A very nice, succinct way of putting it. Change can be good if what you end up changing actually turns out to be something of quality, or it can be terrible if the change ends up making things worse. It’s all about quality of content.
-Mesonak
2 Likes
This is an excellent example of why this has it’s own sub-forum. Taking on the task of rebooting Bionicle, even just hypothetically, is an absolutely monumental task.
But if you are going to reboot something, why would you not change anything? In fact, telling the exact same story over again is going to cause the franchise to become stale. Look at The Force Awakens. As beloved as that movie is, there are many, myself included, who disliked that it was a complete retread of A New Hope, and that’s why so many people want The Last Jedi to be different.
If we rebooted Bionicle again, but the plot was no different than it was the first time around, would you really be happy? What would the point of it be?
1 Like
Here’s the thing, with every single example you have brought up, change isn’t necessarily the issue- the factor that we would be measuring here is how faithful these things are to their source material.
We have seen things change for the better to the point where the masses fell in love with these changes. To this day, The Dark Knight is the most commonly revered super hero movie, and yet a LOT has changed from the source material- from Batman’s costume, Joker’s appearance, to the development of Two-Face and a brand new character never seen in the comics- Rachel Dawes.
All these changes are subjective- you can either hate the new Batsuit or love it- but what has almost undeniably been selling this movie after all these years is the quality and justice it brings to the source material. It’s dark, it’s got a great story, it’s got loads of character, and it’s got great actors- it’s got everything that people would want from a Batman movie.
In comparison to the Last Airbender, there actually were not too many radical changes. It was just a poor adaptation that failed to deliver the qualities that made the show so great. The acting sucked, the story was poorly executed, etc etc.
Basically, change is not the problem. Change is an opportunity for something to become better just as much as it can become worse. What really matters is the context behind the change, and the quality of its execution.
And again, if you want to see a great reaction to change? Please see the Dark Knight’s reviews, or heck, while we’re on the subject of Batman now, go look at the reception to the most recent, most devious change to the character- the LEGO Batman movie.
5 Likes
You know, I realize that if Bionicle would ever give names and faces to its secondary elements, it would best be through the System…well, system. New characters could be invented to represent the other elements by being included in other sets, or even sold in packs as part of a game a la Chima or Ninjago (though I’m pretty sure Lego’s stopped doing that; did it just not work out or what?). They could just be minor characters, but from a marketing standpoint, it could be used to satisfy a lot of fans who want those elements in set form.
3 Likes
You we got his backs we will be there at the front lines supporting him all the way!
@Jon @Mesonak @Ven and @SammySpartan
I believe there has been a misunderstanding about what I am trying to say, and that is understandable given that I have thrown around the word change a lot with a negitive connotation. I don’t think change is bad. I’m not saying that you shouldn’t change anything about G1 when making G3. G1 was great. But we’ve already seen that story, and it’s time for a new one. I agree with most of the idea’s and changes suggested on the podcast discussions, I even made an entire topic based on how I think those changes would best be implemented. And yes those movies were bad in their own right, but part of that was because they have no respect to the source material and made incredibly radical changes that were detrimental to their success. In general I support change. In fact, there is really only one change I’m arguing against here, and that is the elements. To me, any change to the main six elements, beyond possibly the jump from air to jungle, is far too radical. This is because any change beyond that would have massive affects on the Toa Mata, which are what I believe absolutely cannot change. This is because they are the characters we care about. They’ve been here since the beginning and not having them be the Toa to begin G3 with would make it feel less like Bionicle and more like a fan fiction. Which I suppose in the end that’s all it is, but the goal of this project was to create a G3 that was within the realms of what Lego could, and would, do. And I can guarantee you that Lego would never give up the name recognition that comes with the Toa Mata. Anything else can change, but the Toa Mata have to be there.
But, as has been said time and again, they do not have to change at all. As long as they keep their core personalities, their main behavioral traits, what their powers are is not important. Tahu is the hot-headed control freak, Kopaka is the anti-social loner, Lewa is the self-absorbed stoner, Pohatu is the nice guy who wants to be everyone’s friend, Gali is the thoughtful mediator, and Onua is the intellectual, wisdom-spewing bodybuilder. What they’re physically capable of affects nothing about this, and they’ll still be there for G3 as far as I know. That is what counts.
And do you know where those personality traits came from?
Tahu- hot-headed and impatiant- like a raging fire
Kopaka- an antisocial loner- as cold as ice
Lewa- lighthearted and free- like the wind
Gali- the mediator who smoothed over everything- like water smoothed over the rough edges of a stone
Onua- wise- as the ancient earth
And last but not least:
Pohatu- stable and unyeilding- like stone
They’re personalities were based on their elements, changing their element and leaving their personalities would make no sense.
4 Likes
I can see why you say that, however their personalities don’t have to be tied to their elements. I like to think I’m very relaxed and affable, but I don’t have any ties to elements that reflect that.
Which makes a lot more sense than, Lewa-itchy and annoying like poison ivy jungle.
3 Likes
While you are technically correct, the symbolism between the Toa and their elements was largely important to the Toa Mata. Not only were their personalities based off of them, but even their names were variations on the elemental prefixes.
1 Like
Ice is redundant. It’s literally solid water. Stone is like rocks, so it’s distinct form earth, which is like dirt. I rest my case.
These connections aren’t needed. How many people actually thought about this matter in-depth when first presented with what Bionicle was? Like you said, their personalities were developed from their elements, not the other way around. Now that these characters are established in Bionicle history, that symbolism is obsolete.
But if the element-personality link is so crucial, then let’s look at the only one who, as far as I can tell, might get an element change: Pohatu.
“Stable and unyielding like stone” is kind of a stretch. There’s nothing about rocks that screams “stability” more than any other solid element, and none of the Toa are really cowards. If anything, “unyielding” applies more to the stubborn Temperature Boys than Pohatu.
I would define Pohatu as “friendly, kind, flexible, and supportive.” You know what’s flexible and used to support things? Metal. It’s malleable, and used to support buildings just as Pohatu supports his team. It can be welded to other things, and Pohatu is really clingy–“welded,” as it were, to his peers. Metal was used to build the cars in Mad Max, which takes place in the desert, which is the environment in which Pohatu lives. Ok, that last one’s a load of Kane-Ra turds, but my point is made.
1 Like
Are you also a biomechanical knight created by an advanced alien race?
1 Like
Stone has been used as a building material since ancient times for it’s stability.
Pohatu isn’t really flexible, he encourages flexibility in others but once he’s made up his mind he cannot be moved. Like how he made up his mind that the Temperature Twins (clever name by the way) should get along. Never do you see Pohatu back down on what he believes is the right plan, but it should also be noted that it’s never his plan, that’s not his place. As far as supportive, i once again direct you to the fact that stone has been used as a building material since the dawn of civilization, much longer than any metal. Even today metal is used largely as reinforcement for stone (well, technically cement) supports.
2 Likes
It would be better to have the simplest form of each power. That way each character has the option of developing their power and learning how to use it in new ways.
Electricity or ‘lightning’ could eventually be used to generate a magnetic force, and eventually use powers similar to magnetism.
Ice/ Water could be the same element. That’s somewhat self explanatory.
Fire/Plasma are also very similar. Plasma is the visible part of fire.
Plantlife is fairly simple. That works and can be developed.
Earth/Stone could also be developed over the story.
Sonics is specific, but it could also be versatile.
Psionics, depending on how it’s set up in-world would determine whether it would be a flexible ability or not.
There should probably be the base elements, which certain characters specialize to create new abilities.
Basically, none of the main characters should have similar powers to where they would overlap. Secondary characters would be fine.
You’ve cherry picked bad examples.
Batman Begins was the first movie to tie Batman’s training in with the League of Shadows, a huge alteration to his origin story that has been widely accepted and praised.
Civil War changed the entire premise and roster of the conflict between Captain America and Iron Man, and instead made a very politically relevant film with extremely morally gray themes.
Nick Fury was white for almost 50 years before they changed his likeness to that of Samuel L. Jackson in the Ultimates and later on in the MCU. Pretty much everyone agrees that that was a change for the better.
Fight Club changed it’s ending from the book into the film, and it was such a better movie that the author of the book has declared it the better version.
Change isn’t always good, and it isn’t always bad. Adaptations can be on either end. But picking some egregiously bad movies and claiming they’re examples as to why people won’t be on board with changing the elements is very misguided.
Stone is, by and large, the most redundant of all of the elements. At the very least, we will probably go with what was suggested earlier and change his element to Sand. I’m personally in favor of only five elements and nixing one of the characters, but that’s an ongoing debate that will be decided on at the podcast.
Tahu - Tough and unyielding, like stone
Gali - Cool, collected and calming, like the wind
Kopaka - Sharp and consistent, like water cutting through rock
Onua - Powerful, strong and steadfast, like an everlasting fire
Lewa - Lover of the forest and all nature, like the earth
Pohatu - Guy who cools down everyone’s tempers, like ice
Sure, some of these are a stretch. They’re all a stretch, because personalities are more complex than just one vague trait assigned to a character. You could assign elements to almost any personality. Heck, you could assign elements to the cast members of TTV.
And of course, that’s all with this antiquated idea that the characters have to match up with their elements. Characters come first, we can attach whatever element we want to to them later. Not all fire characters will be hot-headed, not all ice characters will be cold and calculating. We’re not going to limit ourselves like that.
5 Likes
Hm… I voted gravity, but I’d almost like to go back on it.
It’s kind of absurdly strong; a Toa of gravity could literally bend time and space. You’d need a pretty good reason to have someone that powerful… Perhaps they could be the seventh Toa?
Then again, that kind of goes with the motif of having a legendary mask of time- add a mask of space and it would almost line up!
5 Likes
The reason I didn’t vote for gravity was simple: color scheme.
I would want Purple and Black for Earth, and you can’t really see gravity, so picking a color combo would be extremely argumentative and controversal.
Having a mask of gravity, however, is a pretty neat idea though!
1 Like
That wouldn’t be a problem under the five Toa plan; just make earth black and brown.
But I guess that’s been shot down big time.
For the record I voted accordingly to the assumption that we were gonna do five Toa. Multiple ground elements are rather frustrating mechanically, as you’re probably aware.