The New American Dream

In 2008, I graduated from UNC Charlotte with a B.A. in Communications in Mass Media, and a minor in Journalism. There are other, more financially profitable pursuits I could have considered, but to be a journalist was my dream and my passion.

The satisfaction of researching a topic and then telling others about it too. The thrill of getting "that interview" that makes the whole story come together. The joy found in discovering a turn of phrase that makes a line work after you had struggled with it. And, most of all, the nobility in keeping a public informed on matters important to their lives.

That's what journalism is to me, and it was something I wanted to be part of.

Has it always been perfect? No. Do the watchdogs on corruption never falter in their vigilance? Of course not. Journalists are human beings, and we all fail sometimes.

But whenever one of us has come up short, someone has stepped up to lift the banner high again, and in its value to a society, journalism has always remained at its core a profession in that same sacred echelon as the under appreciated school teacher.

So, I did it. I took on the classes I would need to achieve my dream, and I took on the loans that were the only way my family could afford to get me there.

In the meantime, I was working for the retail behemoth Walmart, telling myself this was only temporary; only something to keep the bill collectors at bay until I held my degree in my hand, and joined the ranks of society's not-so-silent defenders.

As graduation neared the last few semesters, my excitement rose. A classmate and I competed for an internship at The Charlotte Observer, the biggest newspaper in our region. He got it. I was disappointed (there was a chance of being retained after the internship for exceptional performance), but wished him well and found another opportunity.

Graduation arrived for me in December of 2008. Something else had come before it, though, as anyone reading this will certainly remember. The bottom had not quite fallen out of our economic system, but a significant part of its foundation had undoubtedly buckled.

Layoffs were rampant in many fields, and journalism, already in a state of flux due to ever-progressing communications technology, was among the hardest hit.

My former classmate who had won out over me for the Charlotte Observer internship earned retention -- only to see his new job lost a few short months later in the first wave in a series of massive layoffs. If I was devestated (and I was), I could only imagine what he felt.

Graduation day was bittersweet for many reasons, as they always are. But there was one reason that should never be part of the mix: a sense of hopelessness. Uncertainty, yes, that comes standard. A little fear too. You expect that. But despair?

That's not meant to be part of the package when you're released into the real world after working your butt off to get through -- and stay financially afloat through -- your university years.

My "working my way through college" job became my "keeps a roof over my head" job. It had already been, but I had to view it in a new light as three years passed without success in finding a job with my degree. The newspapers and TV stations never called back. Freelance work was out there, but no matter how romanticized that term may be thanks to Peter Parker and The Daily Bugle, it is not a romantic situation.

Freelance means you do all the leg work of researching and writing an article without a guarantee anyone's going to want to pay you for it. And you do this while still working your full-time retail job so you can afford ramen noodles.

I won't pretend that our journalism professors didn't prepare us for the reality that we would likely never become rich at it. They did. They told us many aspiring journalists would even need to work at something else to make ends meet. Yet they were still shocked by the environment they released us into.

One of them, married to a long-time Charlotte Observer employee, didn't know from one week to the next if her husband would have a job. What hope and encouragement could she offer us?

It was clear doors were not opening for me in my intended career path, but communications encompasses much more than journalism alone. I sought out those alternatives. Human resources. Marketing. Organizational consultant.

These jobs were not non-existent, but everywhere I turned I was met with the same answer: I had no experience outside of only tangentially related work for my university's newspaper and the internship I had performed for Charlotte Weekly. These scarce jobs were going only to those more qualified.

If you've been told the same thing in the past few years and have wondered how you're supposed to get more experience when no one will give you a chance, then know you aren't alone.

While my faith in the possibility of putting my degree to good use continued to diminish, bills continued to be due. One of the more expensive among them has been, of course, the repayment bill on that degree I've not used. Like so many other recent graduates, I've struggled to avoid defaulting on it ever since the first bill became due.

I've kept up with it better at times than others, and worse at times than some. I've certainly begged the College Foundation of North Carolina for every deferral and payment cut they've been generous enough to give me.

Difficult as it is to repay school loans, it soon may become harder. Unless Congress intervenes before the first of July, we'll be celebrating Independence Day with the interest rate on Stafford Loans -- relied upon by millions of low-income students and families -- doubling from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent.

Even as they already face repayment challenges they may not be able to overcome, a cost increase is on its way that is expected to add $5,000 to the average student's final collegiate expenses.

I don't regret working for my degree. At times I have wished, I will confess, that I had "sold out" and pursued something with more fiscal promise -- even if it was less nourishing to the soul.

Shame of feeling that way pushes those thoughts away, though. Pride also. Pride that I stuck to what I love and believe in. The knowledge, too, that I learned so much; an education is an inherently valuable thing.

And more than all that, perhaps, contentment with how my life has played out otherwise. I have a life I love. More than journalism itself.

My wife, her little sister (my surrogate daughter of sorts), her mother (we're as close as any in-laws have ever been), and the rest of those I call family. I am blessed beyond measure, and I know it.

I didn't find the dream I set out to. I found a better one.

In the working world, I'm pretty satisfied too. I will never be rich, but I enjoy what I do. I never did put my degree to any use, but I recently landed shipping work in manufacturing. I was found to be qualified for this based on my extensive experience with mobile equipment and retail inventory systems.

It's enough for me that I've escaped the world of retail, have a slightly better income, have health insurance for the first time in seven years, and don't dread going to work each day. With those things alone I am blessed more than many.

I will manage to repay my loans. I'm not always sure how, but my wife and I recently found that we can pay our monthly bills and have a little left over. We're planning the honeymoon now that we didn't get to take when we got married last September. We're going to be okay.

However, it is not for myself that I am writing this. It is for those who are where I was a year ago. Two years ago. Three. It's for those of you who understand chasing a dime that rolled behind the fridge, because you need every cent you have to get you through the next two weeks.

No, I don't regret my degree. It is an achievement. It's something I wanted, went after and earned. The only achievement in my life surpassing it is my wife and family, though I'm still not sure how I pulled that one off.

All that I regret is that the American Dream -- the American Promise -- can no longer be understood to mean that if you work hard, you will go far. You can work hard and get nowhere.

Cars are powerful machines, but put them in mud and they will only spin their wheels.

Debt is the new American Dream. Debt with the hope that it can be accommodated from one month to the next.

The encroaching tide may yet be stemmed for many if Congress is convinced to act. Two congressional lawmakers have introduced a bill that would prevent the upcoming debt increase. Called the Student Loan Affordability Act, it should at least make what its name implies more of a possibility than doing nothing.

If you wish to do your part in convincing your state senators to support the bill, go to this webpage at USAction/True Majority and fill out your demographic data:

http://act.truemajorityaction.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=365

Some would like to believe that allowing this increase would improve the national deficit and eventually improve our economy. It won't. A whole new generation with extra debt means less money for them to pour into the businesses that could and do drive the economy. It means more stress. It means more unhappiness.

It's said that a wise person will not build their house on sand. For obvious reasons. Depending on where it is, sand is composed of eroded rock, broken-down volcanic material and crushed sea shells.

No matter the composition, it's not stable. So, too, is an economy designed to thrive by making its populace destitute. We aren't going to restore the American Dream by building it on a foundation of the next generation's crushed dreams.

Marriage is like an MMO

I'm back, bitches.

So, yeah, I haven't posted anything in a while, though I've had a lot going on and a lot of thoughts I've wanted to share. I've seen a lot of new movies, played a lot of new video games (expect some forthcoming reviews for a lot of stuff in the very near future!), and been married for almost five months now.

I've also gotten a new job! With health insurance benefits! And reasonable expectations! And better pay! Hell yeah! Free at last, free at last!

I'm half-tempted to compile my experiences in the retail world into a blog of its own. I'd probably call it "Lieutenants of Walmart," though my retail history includes Target as well.

I now have a job in manufacturing. The product? Duct tape! Everybody needs it, and everybody loves it. As Miles Straume said in the last episode of "LOST": "I don't believe in a lot of things, but I do believe in duct tape."

Anyway, I'm back and a whole new series of fun entries await us. But, first, I want to comment on something that recently brought itself to my attention the other day, and that's my view of marriage.

A fella who often goes by the name Omega over at TheLifestream.net asked me what it's like being married. As I tried to answer him, I formed an opinion on the matter even as I typed my response. I wasn't really sure what I felt about it before.

After showing my response to my wife a few minutes ago, she recommended that I share it with everyone -- so that's what made this the moment I came back to The id.

Here's what I told Omega:

----

You might be the first person to have asked me that.

I think it really would depend on each relationship, but in our case, it really doesn't feel any different on a day-to-day basis beyond how we refer to one another. I mean, we don't do anything differently than we did before -- but we also lived together for more than a year before we were married (which I think all couples should do).

It does make me happy whenever I think of the fact itself, though, or look at our wedding photos. I hope I don't give the impression that it's a disappointing arrangement.

I guess it's kind of like the first time you have sex -- you're very glad to no longer be a virgin, even though you could be just as sexually frustrated as before if you never got to do it again. Maybe my subconscious meant that to be a metaphor for marriages/relationships in general being something you have to perform ongoing maintenance on.

I think one of the biggest things people forget to do when with someone, whether married or unmarried, is to keep getting to know the other person. Because they're most likely going to keep on changing -- and it can actually be disastrous to a relationship if one person changes while the other does not.

There's only a five-year difference between Katelyn and I, and we've still had to get used to changes in one another. We brought some very different life experiences to the table when we met, and as she gets older, my "wisdom" (lol) becomes less and less more advanced than hers. Early on, she looked to me for taking care of a lot of things and knowing how to handle crises/legal matters/adult stuff, but as she's developed, I've had to accept that she's not always going to look to me to lead, and she's had to find a balance between asserting her independence and being part of a team.

I don't think I really answered your question all that directly, man, but being married is cool. It's just also a lot like an MMO as opposed to a closed-ending RPG. You gotta keep leveling up and doing the new expansions and shit, or you're going to fumble shit for your guild.

----

So, yeah. The next time your unmarried friends ask you what it's like to be married, tell them it's like "World of Warcraft."

Thanks for asking me that question, Omega. I think I probably learned more about the topic myself than I was able to convey to you.

"Dark of the Moon" brings franchise back into the light

Finally getting around to this review. Sorry for the delay. =(


In what should have been the second installment of Michael Bay's "Transformers" film series, the director and his writers have provided a far superior experience than the previous franchise outing, "Revenge of the Fallen." With a plot that's actually coherent this time around (I'm serious), exhilirating action sequences, a truly star-studded cast, hilarious cameos/supporting roles, and as much heart as the first film -- even if not quite as much charm -- this is a legitimately good movie.

That's not to say it's without problems, however.

First and foremost, the lack of Megan Fox was deeply felt by this viewer. Her replacement, Victoria's Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, left much to be desired -- and not just aesthetically (though definitely aesthetically at the same time). While Fox is hardly Ellen Page or Natalie Portman herself, she's a competent enough actor who seems like an Oscar contender by comparison.

Huntington-Whiteley, who had no acting experience prior to her role in "Dark of the Moon," should stick to what she's good at: throwing up.

One almost wonders if the blond, blue-haired fashion model was cast by Bay as a symbolic "fuck you" to Megan Fox for comparing him to Hitler in how he runs a set. True, he'd worked with Huntington-Whiteley previously in directing a Victoria's Secret commercial, but he definitely didn't cast her for range as an actor. I personally also can't see much basis in selecting her for looks, but to each their own.

In any case, rather than just recasting Fox's character, Mikaela Banes, she was replaced with Huntington-Whiteley's Carly Spencer. The in-story explanation for Mikaela's absence is as poorly conceived as the casting replacement. All we're told is that Mikaela broke up with Shia LaBeouf's character, Sam Witwicky, while Sam describes Carly as someone who actually "appreciates me for me."

The lack of elaboration for all this is annoying, especially in light of how devoted Mikaela was demonstrated to be to Sam in "Revenge of the Fallen." In short, it just doesn't make sense with what came before, and it quite nearly breaks the suspension of disbelief early in the movie.

Speaking of the female roles in the movie, the second biggest quibble I have with it is its lack of significance for them. As Katelyn put it in our discussion while driving home from seeing the movie, "All that's there is a ditzy mom, a useless T&A girlfriend, and a masculine boss lady who insists she's 'not a ma'am' but still doesn't do anything important." Katelyn forgot to mention the female civilians who get vaporized, though. There's them too.

While I love the ditzy mom and wouldn't change her even to bring Megan Fox back, it really did bother me how largely irrelevant Carly was in this movie. She feels like she's just there to be either rescued or a means of coercing Sam into spying for the bad guys for a little while.

Little to nothing comes of her intel about the control pillar in a network the Decepticons had set up to terraform Earth into a new Cybertron, and her only genuinely useful moment in the movie comes in what is literally its last five minutes. There, she manipulates the emotional insecurities of a wounded Megatron into getting the villain to wound another enemy right before Optimus Prime would have been killed, leading to Optimus's survival and subsequent victory over the villains.

As Katelyn noted, though, even then she's just manipulating the egos of men and not doing much else.

I think Carly's status as luggage in the movie would have been less egregious had Mikaela still been around, even if scenarios otherwise remained much the same. Her ongoing relevance in the first two movies would make her seem a lot less like scenery here even if all she'd ended up doing is briefly manipulating Megatron.


Katelyn commented after the movie that, in light of this, it's not as surprising that Megan Fox chose not to participate in "Dark of the Moon." And, yes, no matter what you hear elsewhere, it was Megan Fox's decision; she was not fired. Even Shia LaBeouf confirmed that Megan quit, in part because of her discomfort with how Bay films women.


Speaking of Shia, another gripe I can't help but have with the movie is how so little is made of his character's minor betrayal of the Autobots. Yes, Sam briefly spies for the Deceptions for a good reason (to protect Carly, whom they have taken captive), but you would expect more to be made of it. It's really never brought up again afterward.


One has to wonder if -- since Optimus kept Sam in the dark about the Autobots' plan to strike back after the Deceptions took over -- it was known to the robotic heroes that Sam had been compromised. Even if so, you would expect some exchange on the matter between he and Optimus -- an apology, perhaps, or an assurance that it wasn't a big deal.

In any case, enough about problems with the movie. The things it does right are so numerous that you can't help but overlook the weaknesses most of the time.

First off, perhaps the greatest strength of the film is its amazing cast -- Rosie Huntington-Whiteley being the obvious exception. In addition to LaBeouf returning as Sam Witwicky, and Kevin Dunn and Julie White reprising their roles as his amusing parents, Josh Duhamel is back as Major Lennox, and Tyrese Gibson is once again present as Sergeant Epps. Others well worth mentioning include John Malkovich as Sam's eccentric boss, John Turturro as the even-more-eccentric Agent Simmons from the previous two films, Patrick Dempsey in what is a surprising role for him, and the thoroughly amazing, wonderful, completely made-of-awesome Alan Tudyk (Wash from "Firefly") as Dutch, Simmons's badass personal assistant.


Even Barack Obama makes a small, but hilarious cameo. Yeah, I'm not kidding.


Another strength of the movie is its plot. While it borrows a lot of ideas from past Transformers stories (e.g. the plot to bring Cybertron into Earth's orbit comes from the two-episode storyline "The Ultimate Doom" in the original cartoon, while the Autobots appearing to die after leaving Earth on a shuttle comes from another two-parter, "Megatron's Master Plan"), it still manages to surprise you with a couple of twists, even while it keeps the plot easy to follow, as with the first film.


Also like with the first installment, "Dark of the Moon" focuses as much on character interactions as action set pieces, with the plot moving along organically based on those interactions. "Revenge of the Fallen" could have really used this kind of script treatment.


This movie has also earned a compliment I've never given out before: this was a movie made to be seen in 3D. While I've never been a fan of that gimmick, I thoroughly enjoyed its use here for the first time. Watching the film this way worked so well, I actually forgot I was wearing the 3D glasses when Katelyn and I got up to leave.

Action sequences here are also far superior to the bloated nonsense in the second film, and even the more enjoyable battles of the first movie as well. Quite honestly, some of the most entertaining fight scenes ever presented in a movie are to be found here. Optimus Prime is more boss than ever, and Bumblebee is a ninja -- a mini-boss, if you will. These scenes alone would make the movie orgasmic, but it is great to report that there's so much more substance to it.


As I mentioned before, the heart of the first film is here. There are scenes where the atmosphere and emotion of the moment are allowed to properly set in. You feel for the characters when you should, and actually feel their dread when they dread; that's something we couldn't say for the second movie.


Something else that satisfies the geek in me just as much as the battles is how well everything was resolved. The fate of every Transformer that has been involved in the film franchise up to this point is now addressed, and there are no lingering questions. Even Barricade -- the Saleen Mustang who inexplicably disappeared while en route to the Battle of Mission City in the first film and was never seen or heard from again -- makes an appearance.


Given that this is meant to be the conclusion to the film franchise, resolution was needed, and it was delivered. It feels like a conclusion, and it satisfies like it should.


Despite its few hiccups, this is a really good movie. Go see it. Don't expect it to change your life, but go to have a good time. It will certainly provide that.

Tell Congress to oppose the PROTECT IP Act

If you don't know about the PROTECT IP Act yet, then you need to. It's this bill (Bill S.968; see the full text of it here), sponsored by extremely out-of-touch-with-the-modern-era Vermont senator Patrick Leahy. While it doesn't include any criminal provisions, it's possibly as great a concern for freedom on the Internet as that matter of a "public performance" of copyrighted material becoming a felony, which I mentioned in a recent entry.

Basically, what the PROTECT IP Act (Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 -- totally not a title inflated just so it would make for a handy acronym that could have been the title to begin with) would allow is for a website registered outside the U.S. and accused by a copyright holder within the U.S. of "enabling or facilitating" a violation of their copyright to be rendered virtually invisible to Internet users within the United States (who does this sort of thing sound like?).

The site would be removed from DNS (Domain Name System) directories in the U.S., and sites based within the U.S. would have to take measures to not provide access to the accused site with hyperlinks and such.

The copyright holder would simply need to file a complaint with a U.S. judge and a temporary (haha, yeah, okay) restraining order of sorts would be placed on the website until the accused domain owner could appeal the matter and establish innocence (Sec. 3 (f) (1) & (2)). These shackles of invisibility could be placed on the site the same day a complaint is filed by a copyright holder, as there's no allowance for presumption of innocence written into the bill. The website owner will not even be notified beforehand and given a chance to address the matter.

Basically, there's no required cease & desist letter. It's an option an Attorney General can choose, but is not required to (see Sec. 3 (b) (1)). They simply have to send a notification of the accused violation and intent to proceed with disabled access, and if the Attorney General can't find the domain owner's contact information despite "due diligence," they can order access to the site disabled without even sending them a notification afterward (Sec. 3 (a) (2)).

In either case, "information location tools" like Google would be required to kill any links to the accused site (Sec. 3 (d) (2) (D)), and "financial transaction providers" like PayPal would be unable to facilitate any transactions between the site and U.S. residents (Sec. 3 (d) (2) (B)). Also, anyone providing advertisements for the site would be forced to end association with them (Sec. 3 (d) (2) (C)).

Keep in mind that all of that happens before any recourse is taken by the domain owner.

Even more than how vague all of the terminology and requirements on other sites are, perhaps most retarded of all is that a blacklisted website would still be technically accessible through use of its numeric IP address anyway -- so anybody who's determined to get access is still going to get it, particularly those who are savvy about ripping off copyrighted content and are doing so habitually.

And if you've noted that most of the requirements and limitations imposed by this are on third-parties based in the U.S., then well done.

The impossible logistics of something like this and blatant potential for abuse should be obvious to any, but for whatever reason, the bill has received the support of the National Association of Attorneys General (Roy Cooper, don't expect to get my vote in 2012; stupid asshole). It probably goes without saying that the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) and MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) are backing this, and probably beating off to the text of the bill as we speak.

Just as unsurprisingly, Google's CEO Eric Schmidt vehemently opposes the bill, and a collective of 108 law professors from around the country have written a letter to the U.S. Congress in which they call the bill unconstitutional. CNET has also reported that technologists are warning that the bill would have many unintended consequences, weaker Internet security being chief among them.

Other problems:

-If the site is removed from DNS directories for the U.S. only, that could also lead to the same domain name belonging to a completely different site registered within the U.S afterward. URLs would no longer be universal worldwide.

-What would this mean for websites that feature copyrighted content, but also feature tons of non-copyrighted content? Do we block access to all of it? How is that reasonable?

-What would this mean for sites who rely on advertisements? If they were temporarily closed off to the majority and lost their advertisers, if restored later, would they be compensated for their damages? Doesn't sound like it since Sec. 3 (d) (5) of the bill says "any director, officer, employee, or agent thereof, shall not be liable to any party for any acts reasonably designed to comply with" an order issued under the text.

-Related to the previous point, as Paul Kedrosky notes in this article from the Huffington Post, this bill, if passed, would almost certainly harm entrepeneurs.

-Fair use has always been a vague matter, and a law like this would demand the necessity for it be more concrete.

-What does this mean for a forum/discussion board like TheLifestream.net if they have a link to a site that's been blacklisted? If based outside the U.S., does that mean they are "enabling or facilitating" infringing actions, and then become subject to blacklisting as well? If inside the U.S., do they classify as an "information location tool" like Google?

In either case, are they supposed to keep themselves constantly apprised of blacklisted sites, then scour all of their posts to see if they have a hyperlink somewhere to that site -- every single time one gets added to the blacklist?




This is bad fucking news, people. It's already passed the Senate Judiciary Committee, though it's blessedly on hold at the moment thanks to the intervention of Oregon senator Ron Wyden.

We need to get on making sure this thing is buried right now. Go sign this petition to let your congressional representatives know this is bullshit.

I can't leave you people alone for five minutes

Seriously. What was going to be my review of "Transformers: Dark of the Moon" is now going to have to be an entry about all the idiocy that's going on in the country at the moment (the review is still coming, but it will probably be tomorrow).

In the time since my last entry, CBS News reported that the percentage of children living in poverty in the U.S. is soon to hit 25%, some police in Ohio went Rodney King on this mentally challenged kid, disbarred and disgraced video game hater Jack Thompson has taken to spreading lies in the media again following the Supreme Court's recent ruling to treat video games as art akin to films and novels, hackers discovered that Arizona law enforcement is an organization fuled on racism, the state of Minnesota shut down (though -- as TheLifestream.net forum member and Minnesota native Tennyo noted -- legislators "still found time to squeeze a vote about whether or not to add a ban on gay marriage to the state constitution onto the 2012 ballot. Because crap like that matters when your state is bankrupt"), and insane Minnesota state representative Michele Bachmann has pledged to ban pornography if elected to the presidency (it's no fucking wonder Minnesota is falling apart, huh?).

Oh, and the filicidal Casey Anthony was ruled not guilty in the murder of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee. I've spoken on this matter at length on Facebook already, so I'll just quote what I said there:

"At the very least, the woman is guilty of trying to keep her daughter's death a secret from the world. She's not only a horrible mother (an entry in her personal diary written five days after her child's disappearance said 'I am finally happy'), but is obviously also a horrible person (even were the little girl's death an accident, the average person would call 911 to report what had happened -- not pretend it didn't).

Does this mean she should have been found guilty under the charges aligned against her? I don't really know. Maybe the verdict was legally correct. I don't think it was, for reasons I'll explain soon, but maybe it was. I'm not a prosecutor, and I wasn't on the jury. Ironically, everyone on the jury wanted to convict her, but said they didn't feel the argument the prosecution made was sufficient for a death sentence since it lacked details like 'how,' 'when' and 'where.'

One would think there was a solid enough case to argue her guilt given that murder convictions have been handed down in the absence of actual bodies in the past, and without determining things like 'how,' 'when' and 'where.' In the 1960 case of People v. Scott, for example, it was determined that 'circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide and the guilt of the accused.'

Why the circumstantial evidence in this case (the duct tape, bags and blanket from the Anthony home; the smell of decomposition in the car, as well as the chemical compounds consistent with it discovered therein; the chloroform in the trunk; the 'hair banded' hair in the car, consistent with the phenomenon observed in hair from those who have died; and the diary entry which couldn't have been made in 2003, as the defense claimed, since the diary itself wasn't on the market before 2004) was not enough is a mystery to me. Certainly we don't ever want to put someone away (or send them to their death, as would have been the case here) without feeling we have definitive proof -- but, really, how often do we ever have that in murder trials?

It's so often said that the U.S. judicial system requires proof, but that's not true. What it requires is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Unquestionable proof is a video, or photographic evidence. When do we have those? Even confessions aren't proof, as they have been offered inaccurately before by the mentally ill.

What I personally would like to know is why there was still reasonable doubt in this case. In the very best case scenario, the little girl died in an accident shortly after she disappeared with her mother, and her mother then got duct tape and bags from her parents' home, disposed of the body, kept it a secret for months while lying to everyone about what had happened to her child -- and, in the meantime, went on to have what she herself described as the happiest time of her life.

If this is the best possible case scenario, then that still means she's either a miserable piece of shit or mentally ill.

I suppose what many who are angry are forgetting is that the woman already has spent several years in prison, so she isn't getting away entirely scott free. In the possible best case scenario described above (and how ironically absurd does it sound that, at best, she's either a completely horrible person or a sociopath?), she's gotten the punishment that she would be entitled to. I just don't buy that she isn't entitled to so much more, though.

I feel like where the prosecution blew this case is in going after the death penalty. The jurors' comments paint them, to me, as people with good consciences who didn't want to send someone to their death without something more definitive, no matter how sure they felt she was guilty of the crime. I can understand this. I've always felt conflicted about the death penalty myself, and think it was a poor decision by the prosecution to seek it.

That being said, if a human being offers no sign that they are able to contribute to society in any valuable way, while it can also be demonstrated that they have very likely contributed grievous harm to it (as in this matter), then it seems better to me to take the only punishment offered rather than to allow the person in question to forever escape justice. Due to the Fifth Amendment protection of the so-called 'double jeopardy clause,' a second trial for the same crime will never be possible once the individual has been read a verdict -- even if a confession is shouted from the rooftops afterward.

The only exception to another trial being impossible is if there are grounds for the federal government to try her at this point, which probably isn't the case.

So, what's my conclusion? This: even if the verdict was legally correct, justice was not served."

While this child may not have gotten justice, let's make sure her memory is honored by carrying it as a banner to protect other children -- and get justice for those who we can't. Sign Caylee's Law at change.org to tell your state's senators and other representatives to make it a felony for parents and legal guardians not to report in a timely manner that their children has gone missing.

And on what lighthearted note can be found amongst this horrible, horrible bullshit, there's this: The 15 Hottest Casey Anthony Party Pictures. Dark humor, I suppose, but appropriate.


Speaking of the mothers of babies, though these developments aren't new to the past few days, they did only just come to my attention. Women in some states are facing criminal prosecution after having miscarriages -- and in the case of one Alabama woman named Amanda Kimbrough, six months after her 19-month-old child died, when authorities claimed she had taken illegal drugs while pregnant (she denies this). Georgia has even considered passing a bill that would require women who miscarry to prove that they didn't secretly have an abortion.


So, it's apparently not enough that women who miscarry have to deal with the sadness of losing a baby. They should also have to deal with this kind of misogynistic, demeaning, callous bullshit.


And, yeah, fear of criminal prosecution is going to make pregnancies so much more stress free! This kind of stupidity shouldn't make miscarriages more likely at all!


Fucking retards.


Last but not least, the food supply of these cannabis-eating rabbits was raided by authorities in Brandenburg, Germany. No word yet on whether the plants will serve as a gateway drug to cocaine for the animals now that their usual fix has been confiscated.

It's not all bad news out there, though, folks. California has passed a landmark bill called the Fair, Accurate, Inclusive and Respectful (FAIR) Education Act that "would require schools to fairly and accurately portray the LGBT civil rights movement and the historic contributions of the diverse LGBT community in social science instruction." In addition, the new law "would also add sexual orientation and gender identity to the state’s existing anti-discrimination protections that prohibit bias in school activities, instruction and instructional materials."

So, there is that.

Also, there's  a controversial lottery -- nicknamed "win a baby" in the media -- set to be launched this month in Britain to assist prospective parents in becoming actual parents. Naturally, there's morons complaining with bullshit comments like "It trivializes what is for many people a central part of their lives" (that one in a statement from The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority), but seeing as how the lottery is open to the single, gay, elderly and infertile, it sounds an awful lot like it's going to be helping people establish what will be for them a central part of their lives.

Really, get your priorities straight there, HFEA. That's about as retarded as when you see an organiation called the National Organization for Marriage trying to prevent marriages just because they happen to be taking place between gay people.

Finally, there are these seven pieces of really good news reported by Cracked.com and brought to my attention by TLS forum member Ashes. To summarize them very quickly:

-The Gulf of Mexico is recovering from the BP oil spill way faster than anticipated, and has nearly returned to its pre-spill health levels (which weren't that great to begin with, but, hey, this is still good news)
-Thanks to medical advancements, HIV patients are living decades past diagnosis of the condition. Also, the global rate of recorded new infections is down 25% from 2001
-That hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica is shrinking
-U.S. traffic fatality numbers are the lowest they've been in 52 years
-Teen pregnancy rates in the U.S. are the lowest they've been since the Center for Disease Control started keeping track of the numbers in 1940
-Seems happiness increases with age after all
-Looks like aging in general is lasting longer for the human race. I don't know that I would count on this guy's predictions of aging to be "cured" in the next 25 years (I really think we should stop looking at aging as a disease in the first place; I'm also not convinced that we should live forever), but most people can count on living to a riper old age than their forebears

And that's your look at the world today. Good night, and good luck.

Transformers and continuity

The other day, as I was leaving work, I saw that a new DVD edition of the first season of "Transformers: Beast Wars" -- the best incarnation of the Transformers mythos yet, I would argue -- is now available from Shout! Factory. A Google search or two later, and I learned that the entire series is already available from Shout! as well.

As I never purchased "Beast Wars" on DVD before (the Rhino Theatrical releases from several years ago were always overpriced, even before they went out of print), these highly economical releases bring joy to my soul, and I'm looking forward to putting down the money to purchase the complete series (or maybe talk Katelyn into getting it for me for my birthday -- August 9th isn't far off!).


In honor of these new DVD releases, as well as to commemorate last Wednesday's theatrical release of the conclusion to Michael Bay's "Transformers" film trilogy (I'm hesitant but still somewhat willing to give "Dark of the Moon" a chance despite how badly "Revenge of the Fallen" sucked, and despite the infuriating loss of both Megan Fox and her character, Mikaela Banes, from this franchise; look for my review of that film sometime in the next few days), I've dusted off an article I wrote four years ago (July 29, 2007 to be exact) and allowed to sit on my external harddrive all this time. It's never been published anywhere before, and I'd now like to share it with all of you -- though I must warn you in advance that it abounds with fanrage and geekiness taken to the extreme.

Given my love of "Beast Wars" and the fact that I'm a stickler for continuity (obvious at this point, given past articles here on The Id) perhaps it won't come as any surprise that the article is highly concerned with the continuity of "Beast Wars" and how another series ostensibly billed as its sequel figures into -- or fails to figure into -- the big picture.

In the event that you're not a Transformers geek and haven't already figured out what I'm referring to, this article primarily discusses "Transformers: Beast Machines," another Transformers series from Mainframe Entertainment, though with a completely different creative team at the helm.

I'm publishing this more or less as it was written four years ago, though it's been updated with new information where necessary, and it obviously didn't contain the hyperlinks back then that it now features. Also, be aware that Bob Skir's personal website -- referenced several times in this article -- is no longer available online. Thankfully, I saved the contents of his FAQ page (where he answered questions from fans) several years ago, so I still have access to all of its information.

I do hope you'll find this to be an enjoyable -- and possibly informative -- read.
And I apologize in advance for just how geeky it gets.

----
"Beast Machines Defective"

From conception, "Beast Machines" was doomed to be a massive blight upon the "Transformers" franchise and the minds of its fans. Dan DiDio, an executive at Mainframe Entertainment — currently the co-publisher of DC Comics, along with Jim Lee — was assigned to oversee the third season of "Beast Wars," predecessor of BM, and successor to the original "Transformers" cartoon series. Blessedly, few demands for contrived developments were forced onto the writers of that series, and it ended with dignity 13 episodes later in a satisfying, respectable manner.

Hasbro and Mainframe, however, saw to it that such harmony was not to last, and Mr. DiDio would pave the way.

Within months, plans for a new series were conceived — and poorly so. Set on Cybertron, the metallic homeworld of the Transformers, the series would ostensibly act as a sequel to "Beast Wars." This was merely a selling point, however, as the show was anything but set in the same continuity as BW. For that matter, it was anything but an appropriate choice for a "Transformers" series.

DiDio informed Marv Wolfman — a legendary comic book writer probably best known for tidying up the convoluted DC Comics of 1985 and taking it in positive new directions — that he should waste his talents while penning a premise for a new series, "Beast Machines." Okay, so he didn't tell him that in so many words, but what he did tell him is that BM would have no ties in continuity to the original "Transformers" series — which was a contradiction from the outset, given that BM was reputedly going to act as a sequel to BW, which was very much in continuity with the original series.

Worse yet, DiDio instructed Bob Skir and Marty Isenberg, the story editors and main writers/primary fuck-ups of the series, that they were to disregard past "Transformers" continuity while constructing their "novel for television" (as Skir would later refer to it). DiDio gave this order while absurdly stating that "Beast Wars" had shown too much consideration for continuity (statement found in supplementary materials on Rhino Theatrical's DVD release of "Beast Machines").
Skir has even stated that he and Isenberg were actively discouraged from watching the previous shows.


The result would be a disaster that forever stains the memory of any "Transformers" fan who considers continuity or narrative coherency at all relevant — and, of course, for many, the idea of a large, coherent mythos/continuity is a major drawing point to begin with.

Before going into any problems more specific than that, I would like to first take a moment for a few acknowledgements and to lay the groundwork for the rest of this article. First, be aware that while I too personally disliked the almost universally reviled style of transformation introduced in "Beast Machines" — as well as the new musical style, new visual style, and lack of BW's trademark prevalence of mechnical sound effects — those are issues largely unrelated to the writing, and I'm not interested in addressing them here. Favorable visuals and pleasing audio/sound effects can help craft something wonderful into something perfect — as was the case for me with "Beast Wars" — but the writing was ultimately the deciding factor in excellence or disaster here.

Secondly, I would like to acknowledge that, yes, the original cartoon series from the 1980s itself had its share of continuity quandries. The majority of these were animation blunders that can be — and have to be — dismissed as out-of-story, though there are others not so simple to address. Most notable among these was the ever-changing origin of the Constructicons, with indications of up to three different origins possible (episodes "Heavy Metal War," "The Secret of Omega Supreme" and "Five Faces of Darkness Part 4"), though the uncertain number of units in the ranks of the Sweeps (originally two, then five, then three, and then seven, even with at least two dying along the way) ranks a respectable second along with the puzzle of how the Dinobots, Trypticon, Metroplex and the Technobots gained life without being granted sparks by Vector Sigma.

Despite this, the latter dilemmas are plausibly explainable given the Sweeps' origins (modified from the Insecticons, they may have retained the Insecticons' powers to clone themselves), the minimal intelligence of the Dinobots, Trypticon and Metroplex, and the operational statuses of the Stunticons — with mobility but no display of individuality or personality — prior to receiving their sparks from Vector Sigma. It was only after being given an artificial memory upgrade that the Dinobots ceased behaving altogether savagely and actually seemed to display any signs of sentience beyond that which the pre-spark Stunticons had. Even then, though, it wasn't much.

Arguably, they still had to grow actual personalities as they learned through life experiences. In other words, they had to manufacture sparks for themselves by gainging knowledge and experience, which is ultimately the purpose for which sparks are granted to Transformers in the first place. Possibly in support of this idea, Grimlock gradually became more child-like rather than remaining the stubborn, arrogant and uncooperative character he was initially.

Likewise, Trypticon and Metroplex had little intelligence. Trypticon's behavior was very much like the Dinobots', while the majority of Metroplex's actions were performed manually by the Autobots. On the occasions Metroplex has been known to act on his own in the original series, he seemed to act with limited intellect, even firing wildly upon his fellow Autobots after his eyes had been removed on one occasion ("Ghost in the Machine").

As for the Technobots, Grimlock designed them during his temporary period of genius (an intellect which surpassed that of the Autobot scientist Perceptor), and even implemented components from the same room with Unicron's brain into their design -- possibly granting them something of Unicron's own soul and intellect in the process. That they might have more intelligence than the Dinobots, Trypticon, Metroplex or the pre-spark Stunticons isn't all that surprising. The episode which introduces them even seems to support this notion.

The first Technobot that Grimlock created, Nosecone — whom he assembled outside of Unicron's brain — seemed to have little intellect when first awakened (though still more than the Dinobots did initially), and, in fact, behaved rather like a young child might be expected to. His first act was to ask if Grimlock was his father, and he continued to speak in an uncertain, slightly confused manner. However, when the other Technobots were created at Unicron's mind, they all spoke with distinct personalities along the same lines the Aerialbots did after being granted sparks by Vector Sigma.

The issue with the Constructicons can itself be reasoned with enough fanwanking. Their appearance in "Five Faces of Darkness Part 4" is likely an animation error, especially given that there are eight rather than six Constructicons. Also, rather than being built entirely from scratch shortly before "Heavy Metal War," they may have simply been remodeled to have Earth vehicle forms — manually in the event that they didn't have access to scanning systems like those of Teletraan I aboard the Autobots' spacecraft. It is stated in "The Secret of Omega Supreme," after all, that the Constructicons journeyed to Earth after learning that the primary villain of the original series, Megatron, was there. Of course, their flashback appearance in that same episode portrayed them as already having their alternate modes as Earth vehicles — though this is obviously another animation blunder and not something to be taken as in-story.

In any event, the issue on the table for this article is how "Beast Machines" fits into the larger continuity previously established by "Beast Wars" and the original "Transformers" cartoon, so the original series is not the one on trial here. That said, "Beast Wars" itself arguably had a couple of clashes with the original series' continuity.

For instance, it's been pointed out before that while "Beast Wars" seems primarily set in the continuity of the original cartoon, it references a couple of terms that — at that point in time — were exclusive to Marvel's Generation 1 " The Transformers" comics: the Ark and Primus. Some would argue that this means "Beast Wars" can't be squarely fit with either the original cartoon nor the G1 Marvel comics.

That would be a silly conclusion to draw. The Ark was in the original cartoon series, just unnamed, and though Primus was clearly seen as some godlike entity by the Transformers in BW, no specific references to any past comic storylines were made.

And, of course, at this point, arguing a shared timeline by virtue of simply sharing terms and concepts across "Transformers" series would require one to include both "Beast Machines" and Michael Bay's film trilogy in the same continuity since both feature the Allspark concept. Obviously, no one's going to try making that connection, so doing so with Primus would be ridiculous.

For that matter, even if one tried sticking BW into the convoluted mess that is the Marvel timeline, where would they be putting it? With the U.K. continuity or the U.S. timeline?

Just look at the contradictions standing between them:
—"The Transformers: The Movie" was part of the U.K. timeline, but not part of the U.S. timeline
—The Earthforce arc makes the U.K. timeline irreconcilable with the U.S. timeline, as well as its own at points, for a number of reasons; most involving geographical placement of characters
—The Marvel Universe Appendix website and 2006 edition of the "Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe" identify the two continuities as taking place in different realities: the former identifies the U.S. continuity as belonging to Earth-91274, while the latter's profile on Death's Head establishes that the U.K. continuity took place in the Earth-120185 reality
—Most notably, Bumblebee's reconstruction as Goldbug occurred after being destroyed and rebuilt in two completely different set of circumstances between the two continuities: destroyed by G.I. Joe in the U.S. continuity and by Death's Head in the U.K. continuity

Other potential issues exist for BW, though they were extremely small and easily reasoned out by way of the fact that the Great War depicted in the original series is largely remembered in legend during the present day of the Beast Wars, three centuries after the end of the original show.

The main point of contention in question for "Beast Wars" — the Ark and Nemesis shooting one another down instead of simply being pulled in by Earth's gravity — had actually occurred over four million years earlier. That's plenty of time for the record of small details to be blundered. Likewise with the second continuity issue between BW and the original series: the name of the Ark's computer system, Teletraan I, is shown to be remembered incorrectly by some involved in the Beast Wars as "Teletron I." Rattrap even corrects Black Arachnia on this matter in the final episode of the series, removing any possible continuity errors.

For that matter, any significant loss of history's details — had it actually occured here and not been otherwise explained by the passage of time or emergence of legend — could likely be attributed to the fact that the time period of "Beast Wars" is one in which some information, such as much of that concerning the Decepticon Starscream, has been deliberately classified by the Maximal elders on Cybertron.

"Beast Machines" doesn't have the same excuses to fall back on, and even the wankiest of fans are in for a full day in trying to jerk off an escape for details like Cybertron suddenly having an organic core surrouned by green goo — supposedly its core since day one, with the planet having originally been much like Earth before developing into a sphere of techno-matter. What's more, apparently robots that would one day become Transformers settled on this planet. There is so much wrong with this that it's not even funny. It's just sad.

While the original Transformers series did depict dirt and rock within the lower levels — even the lowest level — of Cybertron on a couple of occasions ("Desertion of the Dinobots Part 2" and "The Dweller in the Depths"), which may allude to the acquisition of Earth-like material in Cybertron's history, the original series also inferred that the core itself was metallic. It was stated and demonstrated that the depths of Cybertron's core — with walls composed of thick metal and accessed through tunnels of the same — served as the housing for the equally metallic Vector Sigma ("The Key to Vector Sigma Part 1" and "Part 2," as well as "The Rebirth Part 2"), the interface to the extradimensional realm from which all Transformers' sparks (their souls) emerge. What's more, this metal apparatus itself claims to be older than Cybertron during "The Key to Vector Sigma Part 1."

While, again, the lowest level of Cybertron did feature rock and dirt, the area identified as the core (Vector Sigma's location) did not, nor was it surrounded by an organic, green chemical. Ignoring these aspects of Cybertronian history and design becomes all the more ludicrous when one considers the fact that several episodes of "Beast Machines" make reference to — and even feature — Vector Sigma and the key used to activate it in the original series (the key and Vector Sigma both made their first appearances in episodes of the original cartoon that depicted Cybertron's metallic core, "The Key to Vector Sigma Part 1" and "The Key to Vector Sigma Part 2").

Adding further to the continuity blunders, the first episode of "Beast Machines" — you can be sure that if it wasn't a catastrofuck from conception then it was from the first installment — is where we find the notion that robots who would become Transformers colonized the planet. This, despite the fact that a major episode of the original series ("Five Faces of Darkness Part 4") unambiguously stated that the Transformers developed from robots built on Cybertron as servants by an alien race known as the Quintessons, beings who had used Cybertron as a factory.

While this doesn't indicate that Cybertron had been created as a factory originally, or that it had never been anything but an assembly of techno-matter, such statements are hardly necessary on this issue given, again, the blatantly metallic core visible in other episodes, and the fact that co-story editor Bob Skir admits to this matter being a continuity error anyway in response to a fan's question on his own site:

"... the big boo-boo, about how the Autobots 'settled onto Cybertron', as if they had come from somewhere else... that verbiage was part of the development before we got to it, and by the time we discovered how fundamentally wrong it was to Transformer history it was too late to change it!"

In the interest of fairness, though, we should consider possible explanations for how all this might still work.

I suppose one could argue that Vector Sigma wasn't at the innermost core of Cybertron — despite being identified in "The Key to Vector Sigma Part 2" as residing "deep in the core" — and that the metallic passageways which led to it had simply been built through the layers of rock. One might also suggest that the "lowest level of Cybertron" visited in "The Dweller in the Depths" is closer to the organic core, but on a side not adjacent to Vector Sigma (this is, of course, assuming Vector Sigma to be offset from the innermost core somewhat). As such, the green liquid around the core may only emerge on the side with rock and dirt.

Not that any of that matters, though, since Skir attempted to cover his mistakes on his site — in response to yet another fan pointing out that Cybertron having an organic core didn't make any sense — by saying that there was no literal organic core; just random pockets of organic material throughout the rock and dirt areas of the planet:

"Let's just say that that the term Organic Core is more poetry than truth... then entire core is not organic goo, but rather there are pockets of the stuff all over the place. We have such pockets on our planet, the oil deposits where we find fossil fuels (Do you realize that cars eat dinosaurs?!). So whereas the pockets of organic matter are not the same as our petrochemicals, the basic idea is the same."

Also in the interest of fairness, we might allow for the legend that the Oracle program foretold (that Transformers would settle on the planet) to have been another historical distortion along the lines of those encountered by the Maximals in "Beast Wars." Unfortunately, this allowance doesn't quite work. The idea of a misguiding legend fails given the revelation that the Oracle program is Vector Sigma ("The Key"), or at least a program surrounding it, which allows access only to "receptive sparks."

There was never any evidence of the Oracle's existence prior to this point. It certainly didn't appear during the Great War depicted in the original series. In fact, anyone could access Vector Sigma — without passing through the Oracle — so long as they had its key or a compatible interface (such as the Autobot Matrix of Leadership or the body of a first generation Transformer like Alpha Trion).

How could the Oracle foretell the coming of Transformers to Cybertron if the Oracle didn't seem to have even existed until approximately 11 million years after the robots that would become Transformers had already emerged on Cybertron (this timeframe established by the original series episode "Forever is a Long Time Coming"), and still several millions of years since they gained the ability to transform? That this might be a simple historical distortion simply makes no sense given that the present day Transformers are well aware of the fact that their ancestors battled on Cybertron millions of years before, whereas only some 300 years is said to have passed from the end of the Great War to the time period of "Beast Wars" in that series's production bible.

As the first notable contradiction between "Beast Machines" and "Beast Wars" itself, by the way, BM's story editors refused to acknowledge this timeframe of only 300 years later, Bob Skir instead choosing to identify it as eons later in response to a fan's question on his website:

"I think a LOT of time passed between G1 and BW, and so that's how it is in Beast Machines. (However, in BW itself, 300 years have passed, since that's how Larry and Bob portrayed it there.) Yeah, I know it creates a sense of contradiction, but all you REALLY need to know is that the entire civilization turned over between G1 and the later series."

This disregard materialized in the show itself through the Autobot city of Iacon, supposedly lost for eons in BM, residing deep under the new city of Cybertropolis. As seen in the original series, shortly before Megatron and his troops were left deactivated for four million years, Shockwave promised him that Cybertron would remain as it had been at the time of his departure ("More Than Meets the Eye Part 1").

What this would suggest is that Iacon wouldn't have been replaced during the four million-year absence of Megatron, in which case Cybertropolis could have only been constructed in the 300 years since the end of the Great War. Hardly eons, even by the standards of short-lived Earthlings, much less those of robots who can live for millions of years, if not forever. Of course, as said before, Skir deliberately broke ties with continuity.

Granted, since this 300-year timeframe was never mentioned in an actual episode of BW, it falls into the same realm of questionable canonicity that all cases of authorial intent do in the absence of being followed up on at a later date by a published work. This is as true of "Beast Wars" as anything else.

For example, the scripted-but-never-animated episode "Dark Glass" has details that figure pivotally into the climactic events of the final episode. It's, in fact, easier to assume — based on what happens in "Nemesis Part 2" — that Rattrap did, indeed, plant a shell program composed of the original Dinobot's consciousness into that of his Transmetal clone.


On the other hand, we have story elements intended by the writers of the series that were never followed up on and can't be reconciled into its completed continuity — namely, the origins of the Vok. Bob Forward preferred to think of them as the ultimate evolution of sentient life, while Larry DiTillio wanted them to be a mutation of the Swarm from an alternate continuity of Marvel's "Transformers: Generation 2" comic, in which — rather than being reformed as a force for creation instead of destruction by Optimus Prime — they had consumed the G2 Transformers, a reptilian race known as the Jadai, and Earth's humans before becoming the more reserved, enlightened race seen in "Beast Wars."

Blessedly, DiTillio's awful, continuity sundering idea never made it into the series, but neither did Forward's. Despite authorial intent, the origins of the Vok remain nebulous. Could this also apply to the 300-year gap between the original "Transformers" cartoon and "Beast Wars"? Perhaps, and for the sake of argument, we'll let it to be so here. "Beast Machines" needs all the help it can get at this point.

Even with some details having been fudged up in legend by the time of "Beast Wars," they were extremely small, and easily explainable, as said before. Not so here, especially given that Rhinox (as Tankor in the BM episode "The Key") is shown to be aware of Vector Sigma from Autobot history datatrax, indicating that these were not among the files classified by the Maximal elders — in which case an Oracle program around Vector Sigma, if one existed, should have been a well-known fact.

Even if we accept that it's reasonable to disregard Vector Sigma's previous description as residing in Cybertron's core, we still find BM utterly incompatible with what came before due to the inclusion of plot elements like Transformers colonizing the planet and the inference that the Oracle program has existed for millions of years. Sadly, the incompatibilities don't end there.

In BM, the key to Vector Sigma has the ability to turn organics on Cybertron into techno-matter, whereas it had previously been stated ("The Key to Vector Sigma Part 2") that this was a different property the key could manifest on Earth — the inference being that no such thing would happen on Cybertron.

For that matter, how the key could be recreated on a whim in a matter of seconds is left unexplained. While it is stated that the activation key is actually just computer code, if it's so simple to recreate it, then why couldn't someone who could access Vector Segma and had as much intelligence as Alpha Trion just make a new one on the spot instead of having to sacrifice his life in order for the Autobots to access Vector Sigma (ibid.)?

With regard to continuity relative to "Beast Wars," we find slightly less obvious but no less obnoxious failures to recognize history. However, in the spirit of fairness — and the spirit of not fallaciously bashing this thing just because there's an opportunity — I would like to point out that one continuity error attributed to it in the past is not actually an error at all. In the first episode of BM, Optimus Primal is stuck in his original gorilla beast mode as a result of a virus released upon the Maximals which reversed the "evolution" of their bodies from BW, removing any and all upgrades.

The misconceived issue here dealt with the body of this original gorilla form being destroyed in the final episode of the first season of BW, and then replaced with a new, upgraded one at the beginning of the next season when his spark was placed into a protoform that had been altered by the very transwarp explosion that destroyed his first body. The transwarp wave had induced a Transmetal mutation in the protoform, which became apparent upon Optimus' return to life.

The wrong conclusion to draw at this point is that due to the new protoform body having already been mutated into a Transmetal, and since said body would have never existed as the more organic gorilla form, it should be unable to "revert" into that form. However, something to keep in mind is that Optimus' spark obviously carried with it the data from the original body, including the use of a gorilla as his beast mode (there's no other obvious reason the new protoform would have selected — or even should have been able to select — such a form; the Maximals certainly weren't keeping a pet gorilla anywhere in their base). As such, Optimus' spark should have contained a record of the same DNA code used in the formation of his original beast mode, with the Transmetal mutation being applied to this data once his spark was inserted.

In other words, once the virus affected Optimus in "Beast Machines" — putting aside any concerns as to how a virus was able to cause such an event in the first place — it should have removed his body's Transmetal mutation, as it did with Rattrap, Cheetor and Blackarachnia, leaving him only with a body programmed to have a gorilla beast mode, and with the same DNA structure as Optimus's original. Prior to contact with the virus, Optimus's body existed as a Transmetal mutation of that DNA (mutated further through contact with Optimus Prime's spark and the Autobot Matrix of Leadership). Without the mutations, the DNA — and, consequently, the beast mode produced — was identical to that of Optimus's first body.

Moving forward to the actual continuity missteps, in the BM episode "Forbidden Fruit," a newly introduced character offers fruit to the established cast — from, of course, a tree growing inside Cybertron — one of whom harshly replies "We eat Energon cubes. Period." This would indicate that the series's writers were either unaware of or in disregard of several instances in "Beast Wars" when Transformers ate animals or plants, including Terrosaur eating a bird ("Power Surge"), Tarantulas eating a rat ("Victory") Dinobot eating his own raptor clone ("Double Dinobot"), Rhinox eating bean vines ("The Low Road"; italicized to emphasize that this is vegetation like the fruit from "Forbidden Fruit"), Tarantulas attempting to eat an antelope in "Code of Hero," and Dinobot remarking that he would be shooting his dinner salad before eating it in the future ("Gorilla Warfare"). While that last one was said in jest, that the concept isn't a foreign idea to Dinobot — when considered along with those other events, of course — is rather telling.

For that matter, the entire premise of the heroes' technological bodies being reformmated by the Orcale into techno-organic constructs in BM's first episode is rendered irrelevant and absurd by the fact that — once the Transmetal mutations had been removed by the virus affecting the Maximals — their bodies from "Beast Wars" already were techno-organic. Which was kind of the whole point for the beast modes in "Beast Wars" to begin with: organic shells to protect the robots from shorting out due to the high levels of energon present in the surrounding area. The scanners that identified beast modes for these Transformers had even replicated the creatures' DNA and included it in the subsequent designs.

These concepts were, in fact, a major element of at least two episodes: "Double Dinobot," in which Dinobot is cloned through the DNA of his beast form, and "Call of the Wild," in which the robots began to be taken over by the instincts of the animals whose forms they'd adopted. Sure, the Maximals that "Beast Machines" focused on the most had undergone Transmetal mutations, leaving their bodies mostly metallic (entirely in Optimus Primal's case, and possibly Rattrap's as well), but they still retained organic parts — and quite a bit of said parts once reverted to their original beast forms by the virus mentioned earlier.

For that matter, achieving a balance between their organic and technological components was another concept well gone over long before "Beast Wars" ended. It was the main premise of the "Call of the Wild" episode, and featured into other episodes — sometimes prominently. The idea of that balance was even a cornerstone of the character Tigatron's personality. "Beast Machines" was simply treading already well-tread ground with its entire plot.

Speaking of personalities, they were one of the greatest aspects of BW to suffer in the transition to "Beast Machines":

—Rattrap is suddenly no longer just a little whiny and a little self-centered, while still also being someone who is more concerned about others and who can be counted on, even to the point of temporarily being chosen for leadership ("Chain of Command"); he's now completely self-absorbed instead.

He's no longer courageous in the face of danger while also being remarkably fond of preserving his existence; instead, he's a genuine coward. He's no longer a resourceful soldier of remarkable wit and skill, capable of operating effectively even when unarmed ("A Better Mousetrap" and "'Other Voices' Part 1"); instead, he feels completely useless if he's not packing lots of firepower, and is even willing to betray his friends to strike a deal with Megatron of all people to get some weaponry ("The Weak Component").

The Rattrap of "Beast Wars" would have never done this. Not genuinely at least. Sure, he was willing to go along with a ruse at the behest of his commander, Optimus Primal, in which he pretended to defect to the other side ("Double Jeopardy"), but he would have sooner died than truly betray his friends — especially to make a deal with Megatron.


He may have ventured off on a mission alone, sure. He may have even asked Megatron to arm him in exchange for defending the tyrant while he was weak and vulnerable. However, he would have then immediately turned those weapons on Megatron himself.

Rattrap hated Megatron, and was also untrusting — if not usually borderline racist — toward the villain's kind (Predacons) to begin with, which often led to conflicts between he and Predacon defectors who became his comrades during "Beast Wars." Nonetheless, loyalty was at the core of Rattrap's character, even for the former Predacon Dinobot, whom Rattrap ultimately came to respect, befriend and missed deeply when death stepped between them.

Speaking of Rattrap's loyalty to his friends and comrades, the Beast Wars with Megatron's forces cost Rattrap no less than four of them. Megatron was directly responsible for the deaths of three of them, and contributed to the death of the fourth. Rattrap seemed to remember these deaths when he became incensed that light was made of the Beast Wars by a newcomer ("Survivor") — but not when it mattered, when he was betraying their memory to bargain for power and shooting at his remaining friends to defend a weakened Megatron because he had given his "word" to the villain, and because Megatron was a "defenseless opponent."

The Rattrap of Beast Wars wouldn't have given a shit about his word or capping a defenseless opponent when it came to such an opportunity, especially given the significance of the situation (it's fucking Megatron, for God's sake).

For Rattrap to have made a genuine deal with an enemy Predacon and then defended him — especially Megatron, murderer of several of Rattrap's friends and the tyrant responsible for stealing the spark of every Transformer on Cybertron — for some weapons is so out of touch with who the character is that an altogether different character might as well have been used. An altogether different franchise might as well have been used for what the writers wanted to do, for that matter, but we'll come to more on that later. For now, we can continue with the degrading portrayal of the characters.

—Optimus Primal is no longer a wise, clever leader, calm, reasoned and patient. Instead, he's hasty, irrational and even a little stupid. To be entirely honest, he seems mentally unstable for the first 13 episodes or so.


He's constantly angry, yelling at his troops every other sentence, even when there's no obvious reason for why he should be. Worse still, Optimus instantly takes to believing — unshakably so — that he's supposed to allow organics to take over Cybertron, even if that means destroying all the techno-matter, rather than realizing that his mission in the series is to create a worldwide balance between the organic and the technological.


This would be bad on its own, but it's all the worse due to his mission to "seek the balance" being clearly spelled out in the first episode by the Oracle computer system that Optimus suddenly, randomly, and inexplicably holds in extremely high regard, and which he strives to serve with a fanatical religious zeal. A complete bastardization of a fantastic military commander and fun character.

—Rhinox. Christ, where to begin with this guy. While there isn't as much to say about his defilement as there is about Rattrap's, the effect is no less perverse. By co-story editor Bob Skir's own confirmation (again, in a response to a fan's question on his own site), Rhinox's spark had not been corrputed nor was his mind deranged when he decided that he wanted to see all organics on Cybertron destroyed and then began trying to kill the friends he'd once been so loyal to.

Arguably, this kind of change in his character makes even less sense than those mentioned in Rattrap and Optimus above. Of all the heroes in "Beast Wars," with only moderate exceptions to Tigatron and Airazor, Rhinox valued the organic aspects of their designs, appreciated what they provided, and just plainly regarded them as something positive.

Hell, a favorite hobby of his was smelling flowers ("Dark Designs") and he even kept a potted plant that he took the time to save during an evacuation of the base ("'The Trigger' Part 2"). Suddenly he hates organics? Not buying it. This was Rhinox in name, voice actor and appearance only. This was not Rhinox in spirit. Skir and his fellow main writer, Marty Isenberg, just didn't get the character. At all.

—Megatron, main villain of both "Beast Wars" and now "Beast Machines," has — without explanation of motive or reasoning — abandoned his megalomania, including his trademark conversations with himself featuring utterances of "yesss." More importantly, he's also abandoned his simple desire for conquest in favor of being what he sincerely sees as Cybertron's savior.


He remains the villain due to believing that acting as Cybertron's Jesus will require him to eradicate all organic life from it, neutralize all other Transformers' individuality, and operate Cybertron as one giant "flawless" computer with himself as its central intelligence, but this sort of misguided benevolence is not part of Megatron's personality. Nor is a need to honor his word for that matter, as he seems so hung up on in "The Weak Component." In "Beast Wars," Megatron was shown to be more than willing to break an agreement the moment he'd gotten what he wanted out of it ("'Other Voices' Part  2").

This kind of thing is simply not a natural evolution of the character, and Skir has admitted — again, on his own site — that he dropped Megatron's speech quirks and his previous motivations of out-and-out greed in favor of something he personally would prefer. Yes, a bad guy who is bad simply because he's bad can be boring, just as Skir testified ("Badguys with no motivation, who are evil just for the sake of being evil? BO-RING!"). Yes, a villain with a worldview in which he's doing something good from his point of view is more interesting. Absolutely.


However, that's not the kind of character Megatron is. When coming onboard something like this, one should write the characters as they are, not simply the way the writer personally wishes them to be — or at the very fucking least, try to give an explanation for the change.

Skir and Isenberg changed the guy's entire motivation without offering the slightest insight into why he would suddenly think this way. These guys were not interested in writing Megatron. They weren't even interested in writing "Transformers." They were interested in writing their own damn thing with their own — admittedly interesting — ideas, but must have felt the only way they were going to get the chance to present them to a large audience was if they capitalized on the opportunity presented by being the head writers on a show that would come with a built-in fanbase.

The only ideas for a change in characterization to have made sense and been genuinely interesting were Cheetor's maturation into the team's second-in-command and occasional leader, as well as Silverbolt's depression after being reprogrammed to fight his friends and romantic partner. Silverbolt's subsequent self-loathing and desire for revenge on Megatron were logical reactions for the character, and Cheetor's changes involved him growing as a person, not randomly turning into someone different just for the sake of being shocking, or because the writers just wanted him to be someone different.

I'm a firm believer in giving credit where it's due, and this bit of characterization is all in the entire series that I would actually applaud. I'd still say it was too thorough too quick in Cheetor's case, though, with his past playfulness being completely abandoned from the outset and never returning.

More examples of Skir's personal preferences bastardizing an established universe come to light with the heroes' lack of guns. Suddenly they all use either bladed weaponry or various means of energy projection. Though some of Skir's early responses to questions from fans about development of the series included statements that the network (Fox, to be specific) was placing greater limitations than "Beast Wars" had to face on the violence allowed in children's programming, he later admitted that he doesn't write heroes who use guns and doesn't like them (most of the villains in BM still use guns or cannons of one sort or another).


Even without this admission, though, the reality of the matter would have been obvious. Being produced — and, in fact, already airing on Fox — at the same time was the ninth season of the "Power Rangers" franchise, subtitled "Time Force," which featured a typical element of "Power Rangers" seasons that came before: its heroes used guns. Specifically, blasters that discharged lasers and similar energy pulses. In other words, weapons in the same style of those used by damn near all Transformers in the original series, and similar to those used by some of the gun-wielding heroes in "Beast Wars."

For that matter, though the "Time Force" blasters weren't guns that fired bullets — whereas some of the guns in "Beast Wars" did — one such gun did appear in the series in the second episode, where it was pointed at the primary villain by a police officer, no less. Clearly, Skir was poorly stretching the truth in a callous, failed attempt to cover his own ass.

He even went so far as to imply that the use of guns and the use of cunning were incompatible concepts, going on to further arrogantly state that fans who wanted to see guns in use could go read Marvel Comics's "The Punisher." I'm not exaggerating. He really said this:

"Our heroes use their wiles and resourcefulness, plus a few cool weapons. Guns? I've never been a fan of them myself, and do not write heroes who need them. My heroes win by *not* firing a shot, but rather using cunning. For those who like guns, go read the Punisher."

So not only did Skir disregard nearly 15 years of the primary style of combat in all mediums and continuities of the "Transformers" franchise because of his own personal preferences, but he insulted the intelligence of those fans who were well aware of this most obvious form of combat, implying that they were hungry for mindless shoot-outs. That isn't even taking stock of the multiple other instances in which he haughtily dismissed the comments of those who found extreme fault with his writing and direction for the series — even as he admitted that the majority of comments he received were unfavorable.

But I'm getting away from the faults within the series itself and focusing on Skir, which isn't where this review needs to be. Getting back on track, and following up on the matter with the guns, even putting aside the fact that every other incarnation of Transformers story-telling up to that point had involved the use of guns — with them even finding use from Optimus Prime, the most iconic and beloved of all characters to ever exist in the franchise — the very characters Skir was supposed to be writing about in "Beast Machines" had used guns in "Beast Wars." Consummately, in fact.

Not counting those heroic Transformers who had guns or cannons mounted to their actual bodies (meaning only those who held such weapons in their hands, as is done in reality), all but three out of 11 used external guns — and those other three still employed some kind of self-mounted projectile weaponry (machine guns in the case of one). Of the five heroes carried over from "Beast Wars" to "Beast Machines" — six if one counts the unrecognizable Rhinox — only one of them (Silverbolt) was a character who hadn't used external guns in BW.

Skir wouldn't even be able to use Hasbro's toy designs as an excuse for the lack of guns. According to him, the toy designs were a collaboration between himself, his co-story editor and Hasbro. For that matter, even if he didn't have any say in whether the toys got projectile weaponry, the creators of "Beast Wars" still managed to incorporate such weapons for their characters' use despite the original Transmetals toys coming without any.

All of this so far still doesn't address all of the continuity issues, but before we move to those self-contained within "Beast Machines," we have to finish addressing its problems where "Beast Wars" is concerned.

The remaining inconsistencies with BW concern the character Waspinator. At the end of "Beast Wars," Waspinator was left behind on prehistoric Earth, the only one of Megatron's troops to survive. In "Beast Machines," however, he has inexplicably shown up and is serving as Megatron's motorcycle Vehicon general, Thrust. According to the episode "The Catalyst," Waspinator was cast out by the early humans that had begun to worship him at the end of BW. However, absolutely no explanation is offered for his return to Cybertron (beyond him saying it "took forever"), nor for his return to his proper place in time.

It seems unlikely that Waspinator could have even escaped Earth's atsmophere given that neither he nor any other flying Transformer did so during the course of the series without the aid of a modified stasis pod, and it seems equally unlikely that Waspinator would have had the intelligence to modify a stasis pod himself if he was lucky enough to discover one still intact. Even Tarantulas, perhaps the most intelligent of all Transformers depicted in "Beast Wars," wasn't sure the improvised spacecraft he designed from a stasis pod would work until Optimus Primal used it.

Even had Waspinator been able to find one and somehow gained the wits — or had the luck — to properly modify it, one would still be left to ponder how he was able to get back to his proper place in time, much less travel in the correct direction to reach Cybertron, if and when he did.

Perhaps a bigger question is how Blackarachnia knew that she and her fellow Maximals had left Waspinator alive in the past. After all that they had been through, including barely surviving a time storm that almost erased them from existence, it would be absolutely stupid of them — not to mention out of character; though that obviously didn't stop the story editors in any other respects — to deliberately leave an unpredictable variable like Waspinator in the past while traveling into the future, where any damage he may have caused would likely be irreversible.

At least with the final episode of "Beast Wars" one could reason that the Maximals believed Waspinator to have been killed along with Quickstrike and Inferno. He had been blown to scrap by those other two after all, so if the Maximals performed the likely operation of confirming the deaths of Waspinator's comrades, they would have probably seen his remains prior to his reconstruction as well.

All that out of the way, we can now focus on those plot holes exclusive to "Beast Machines" itself, which serve to undermine its credibility further.

First, how is it that the entirely organic Transformer Savage/Noble (initially Megatron in disguise) came to exist? While it's certainly implied that it was a result of Megatron's organic mode (that of a dragon) somehow becoming his dominant form, given that his body — techno-matter, organics and all — disintegrated ("Fallout"), how did he have an entirely organic body at all? Also, if he was able to decide to "make his own destiny" in the same way that Optimus Primal did, why is it that he was trapped in a purely organic body upon emerging from the Oracle, rather than a techno-organic body (or at least a purely technological one, as he would have chosen)?

For that matter, how is it that an altogether organic Transformer could exist in the first place, and why would Megatron's new purely organic form change from a dragon to a wolf? Obviously the dragon form was derived from his beast mode, but from where would a wolf design — much less wolf DNA — enter the picture?

Finally, if Megatron's diagnostic drone didn't have a spark ("The Key"), then why did it display a personality along the same lines as one could expect from a robot with a spark? It had individuality, a fear of its own death, and certainly more personality than was displayed by the Stunticons when they were still without sparks. Even if the drone was created without a spark, it certainly had gained a personality.

As conceded earlier, the writers had some fantastic and engaging ideas for a story — I honestly adored some of the concepts involved, particularly the elaboration on what previous continuity had indicated about the nature of the Matrix, Vector Sigma and sparks. I also loved the character of the diagnostic drone.

However, they picked altogether the wrong franchise in which to present most of their ideas, especially given that it required subverting and deconstructing a mythos that had been in place well before they showed up, and which was loved by millions. Their ideas could have made for a good story, but not a good "Transformers" story. At least not in the manner they went about it.

Perhaps a story involving the Transformers and their planet becoming techno-organic could have been okay if it wasn't accompanied by drastic deconstruction of and disregard for firm history — not to mention horrific vivisection of returning characters' personalities. Presented as it was, it shouldn't have used the cast of "Beast Wars" and suggestions that it was set in the same continuity should not have been made. It may well be that the series would have worked best set in an alternate reality altogether, along the lines of "Transformers Armada." As it stands, this is just a fucking disaster.

All this said, I do think Bob Skir has done excellent work on other cartoon series from the 1990s ("Godzilla," "Batman: The Animated Series" and "X-Men" immediately come to mind), is a good writer when not working on things related to Transformers, and can come up with some truly engaging ideas. I also don't think he deserved the death threats he got over "Beast Machines" (seriously, that's just fucking retarded; bad decisions he may have made as a writer, but he's a fucking human being while "Transformers" is fiction), and I think it's a shame that he felt too uncomfortable to attend BotCon 2000.

Pretty much the same comments apply to Marty Isenberg, who ducked out of the limelight while "Beast Machines" was on the air, and was probably much happier on a day-to-day basis for having done so.

Well, that's the end of this article. If you read this far, I thank you for bearing with me. I hope you enjoyed it, and maybe learned something interesting. Now go do something genuinely fun with whatever's left of your day.

----


Again, thanks for reading!