Transformers: Dark of the Moon (Transformers 3)


Recommended Posts

Thanks, that did help a bit. When the wiki page started talking about Vector Sigma and Quintessans my mind just exploded. I remember watching the 80s cartoon when I was a kid, but I couldn't tell you anything about the lore or storylines. So, this was definitely helpful.

A few ancillary questions: Are Quintessans organic alien lifeforms? Are they "evil"? Do they still exist?

The Quintessans are organic. They originally tried to create organic/robotic hybrids before the Transformers (Trans-Organics I think they were called) but they proved to be too unstable so they were locked away inside Cybertron.

They are technically evil, in that they only want to do things for their own ends (creating the Transformers to do everything so they could live a life of luxury), but they aren't evil in the same vein as the Decepticons who want to destroy everything. The Quintessans are just as likely to ignore you if your existence has zero impact on them, but if your death served them then you'd be dead before you could blink. Whereas the Decepticons would kill you if the thought occurred to them when they saw you.

Are they still around? Interesting question. In the first Transformers movie (animated one where we saw Unicron and Galvatron for the first time) the Quintessans are the ones on the junkyard planet (five faced judge who sentences robots to death whether they are innocent or guilty, the tentacled creature that is the equivalent of the bailiff may have been one but he didn't have the five faced aspect). In the animated series that continues after the movie they blew up their home planet in an effort to destroy the Matrix of Leadership which Rodimus Prime had in his chest. Didn't work as Rodimus escaped, and then the Quintessans kind of scattered. That's where my knowledge of them fades a bit. They may have shown up later, but I can't remember.

Alpha Trion = One of the first Primes (who are all dead now, with the death of The Fallen in TF2)

I thought that old plane robot guy wasn't a prime? But He was some sort of other robot and Optimus Prime was a prime and that is what He was suprised to see before he died? Did Optimus die in the second film? It's been ages since I saw it :p

that cannot be unicron, unicron is the size of an bloody planet, and he is in a ship so its not him

Ah ha, but you must remember that Scorponoc in the (animated) movie was a whole city, but in the (new) movie it was just another transformer, much smaller than the Autobots so it seemed?

The problem with having him as Alpha Trion has already been spoken about.

I'm not saying this is Unicron (I hope not!) or Alpha Trion (I hope not too!), there are complications with both characters so maybe it's neither?

The Quintessans are organic. They originally tried to create organic/robotic hybrids before the Transformers (Trans-Organics I think they were called) but they proved to be too unstable so they were locked away inside Cybertron.

They are technically evil, in that they only want to do things for their own ends (creating the Transformers to do everything so they could live a life of luxury), but they aren't evil in the same vein as the Decepticons who want to destroy everything. The Quintessans are just as likely to ignore you if your existence has zero impact on them, but if your death served them then you'd be dead before you could blink. Whereas the Decepticons would kill you if the thought occurred to them when they saw you.

Are they still around? Interesting question. In the first Transformers movie (animated one where we saw Unicron and Galvatron for the first time) the Quintessans are the ones on the junkyard planet (five faced judge who sentences robots to death whether they are innocent or guilty, the tentacled creature that is the equivalent of the bailiff may have been one but he didn't have the five faced aspect). In the animated series that continues after the movie they blew up their home planet in an effort to destroy the Matrix of Leadership which Rodimus Prime had in his chest. Didn't work as Rodimus escaped, and then the Quintessans kind of scattered. That's where my knowledge of them fades a bit. They may have shown up later, but I can't remember.

Thanks for the clarification Aldur82. I never realized that the Transformers universe was so complicated until I visited this thread. :pinch:

Could it be? Is this really what Megatron will look like in TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON?

One of our handy dandy anonymous scoopers sent us what appears to be the new Megatron toy. Oh, you boys must be feeling a bit of excitement in those Decepticon underoos of yours. I guess that strange tanker truck turned out to be more than we had bargained for.

Below you can check out the toy before and after transformation. I've also provided a pic of the tanker truck on set so you can compare and contrast. Notice that it looks like his face has been all beat to **** as a result from the battle of the last film, REVENGE OF THE FALLEN.

184996033.jpg

898345448.jpg

455729759.jpg

988701013.jpg

If this is Unicron, does that mean Megotron may die in the next film and we'll see the birth of Galvatron, Rodimus Prime and Ultra Magnus?

idmm2u.png

Problem with that is that this will be the last film of the Transformers, any more will be a reboot or done by another director etc, won't happen. I think Megatron will get killed off this time round, for good, but the Alpha Trion idea is still the best idea at the moment.

I remember reading about Michael Bay telling some interviewer he didn't want to use Unicron. He said it would make this even less realistic than they already are. Also, Unicron in the last movie wouldn't be such a good idea IMO. It's the last movie and Unicron shouldn't have such a small part in this trilogy if you ask me. And I'm sure Michael Bay wouldn't commit blasphemy by making Unicron a smaller Transformer who could stand as tall as all the other Transformers.

But if you look carefully, he looks too much like Unicron:

unicron1a.jpg

I must admit, I can see the resemblance, but I agree with Rappy, if Michael Bay wanted to put Unicron into a film, he would play a much bigger role than just for one film. Unicron is meant to eat planets, he's a little too small for that to be honest. :p For all we know, it could just be Michael Bay misleading people again like he did with Megatron in the second Transformers film. The colours look like Unicron, but it still could be Alpha Trion. Also, it'd make sense to use Alpha Trion as he is even older than Jet Fire/The Fallen and co.

Unicron would be awesome, but he would be over the top for just one film.

it has to be unicron for a number of reasons

1. unicron is the transformer that turns megatron into galvatron, and rappy has evidence of galvatron action fiqures, and also at the end of the movie megatron is extremely crippled so perfect opportunity.

2. it seriously does look like unicron in the trailer

i think michael thought that having a transformer the size of a planet is just a bit too much of a challenge to deal with

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Maradona if hydration breaks had existed in Mexico 86.
    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!