Why Did Nobody Tell Me?

In amongst all the excitement of the last few weeks, I neglected to mention my exciting new find: when hunting for Christmas presents during the Black Friday sales, I happened upon the not-quite-latest range of Transformers toys. And it seems that the "Return of the Legends" line was followed by a "Power of the Primes" line... which featured new versions of the dinobots!

But there's more even than that. Because not only are the dinobots cool in and of themselves, and not only do these new toys closely resemble the originals (but better, it would appear), but...

• It looks like the new dinobots are actually a combiner set, able to merge to become Volcanicus!
  
• There's a new dinobot! She's called Slash, and transforms into a velociraptor. (Of course she transforms into a raptor. After Jurassic Park, how could she be anything else?)

Of course, this is all counterbalanced by the silliness of renaming Slag to Slug. This appears to be something to do with the slang associated with 'slag', but that then leaves me confused - what with 'slash' being slang for 'pee' (that said, pretty much everything is slang for 'pee' somewhere...)

Anyway, all of this raises the crucial question I raised above: why did nobody tell me?

Retiring the Tablet

A few years ago, I invested in a Hudl 2 tablet from Tesco, largely because it was quite cheap and relatively powerful for the price. And it was quite useful... for a while.

The truth is, though, it really didn't last long before outliving its usefulness. And as soon as I invested in a smartphone it immediately became obsolete - there's nothing I would use the tablet for that I wouldn't use the phone for instead. (And equally, while there are some things I wouldn't use the phone for, for those things a PC is still the tool of choice.)

The upshot is that the tablet has now been retired from use. It's not that we're getting rid of it (yet), and it's certainly not that we're going to upgrade to the latest model. It's just that that form factor turns out to be a solution that doesn't really have an associated problem. Which feels wrong, somehow, and yet... not.

#44: "Pathfinder: the Six-Legend Soul", by Amber E. Scott

Why the Return of Optimus Prime is a Bad Thing

This blog is never one to shy away from controversial topics, nor from addressing the burning issues of the day, and so we come to a blog post that may surprise some.

A few weeks ago, as part of my project to retire my Region One DVDs, I purchased a set of the Transformers DVDs for series 2-4. I'm now nearly at the end of my watch-though, with only two episodes in series 3 (plus the 3 episodes of series 4) to watch. Those last two episodes are the long-awaited "Return of Optimus Prime", where the producers responded to the massive backlash from the film by bringing back the most beloved of all Saturday morning heroes. (Indeed, so massive was the controversy that when the film was released in the UK they felt the need to add an epilogue in which that very return was promised! And they call this the Snowflake generation!)

But there's a big problem with the return of Optimus Prime - it's a really bad thing.

"Transformers: the Movie" is little more than yet another retelling of the Hero's Journey - Hot Rod starts as the brash young hope, gradually learns maturity and leadership, and eventually fulfils his destiny to release the power of the Matrix. (Incidentally, it's also something of a retelling of the end of the Exodus - Optimus Prime is Moses, the leader who is allowed to see, but not to enter, the Promised Land, Ultra Magnus is Joshua the warrior, and Hot Rod is David the promised king. Oh, and Unicron is Goliath. But I digress.) And the Hero's Journey is essentially the story of the transition to adulthood - the boy becomes the man.

One of the big themes of the third series of Transformers is Rodimus Prime's (Hot Rod's) struggle to live up to the legacy of Optimus Prime. He's constantly doubting himself, and needs reassured that he's doing a good job. Indeed, in two episodes ("Dark Awakening" and "The Burden Hardest to Bear") gives up leadership for one reason or another. But in both cases he eventually learns his lesson, resumes the mantle, and grows as a result.

Now, Rodimus Prime frankly isn't a patch on Optimus, partly because nobody could be, and partly because the character is really quite lame - right from the name ('Rodimus' comes from mashing up 'Hot Rod' and 'Optimus'); the fact that the toy is less good than Optimus, Ultra Magnus, or even Hot Rod; and that self-doubt makes for difficult storytelling. And yet, that character arc is actually one of the strongest parts of the otherwise very poor series 3 - having to overcome doubt and learn that you don't have to live up to an illustrious predecessor is a surprisingly mature theme for a children's TV show.

The problem with the return of Optimus Prime is that it necessarily reverses all that, and negates everything that has gone before. Rodimus is forces to give up the Matrix, and leadership. He reverts to the brash young hope that is Hot Rod. He ceases to be the adult he has become, and instead returns to being a child. Which, as life lessons go, just sucks.

The death of Optimus Prime is one of those things that I'm sure the makers of the series really wish they hadn't done, but it's also one of the biggest strengths of the movie, and one of the reasons that it still holds up where so much else from that time just falls by the wayside. And replacing Optimus with Rodimus was always going to be a really hard sell. But, from a storytelling perspective, it is really better to live with it and move on, rather than just negate the whole thing and pretend it never happened.

Buying Presents for a Six-Year-Old Boy

"He likes Tranformers, Lego and Superheroes." So, yeah, that's going to be a tough one.

In order to achieve this mighty quest, we went on Friday to our local toy store, which is less than ten minutes' walk from the flat. Once there, I proceeded to pick out the thing that most screamed out to my inner child to buy. Strictly speaking, there was a need to look out for something fitting the theme, but given that Transformers, Lego, and Superheroes are all inherently awesome, that's not so much a limitation as just a given.

Frankly, the only difficulty is choosing which of the three to get. And even that's less difficult than it seems: you can now get superhero-themed Lego (both DC and Marvel, which is even more awesome), and near-Lego Transformers.

The only problem is that modern Lego is just too awesome. Lego "Star Wars", Lego "Pirates of the Caribbean", Lego superheroes, Lego "Lord of the Rings"... It's a good thing they also put maximum ages on the box, or I could have spent a fortune in there!

Oh, and finally: Happy Birthday nephew #1!

No wonder they're called the terrible twos...

It was my nephew's second birthday today (which is frankly absurd, but that's another rant for another time - what little time I have left, that is). With a gaggle of aunts and uncles, that boy is quickly acquiring a fearsome array of toys, fit for any child to put away in a closet and rarely if ever play with.

Actually, I think there may perhaps be a need to have a couple of conversations about gift values - certain aunts seem to be rather more extravagant in their giving than certain uncles, which isn't actually terribly fair. Especially when dealing with a child, who by virtue of age might not grasp that just because a person doesn't give as much doesn't mean that they don't love as much.

However, that's not really what I want to talk about. Instead, a reflection on just why that difficult third year is sometimes referred to as the "terrible twos":

When a child is new-born, everything is being encountered for the first time. The crushing banality of life hasn't really had a time to set in, and things are really quite exciting.

Then, when the child turns one, there follows the most productive year of his life. He learns to walk, and to talk, and it's all very exciting. Extremely significant events, there.

But once the child is two, what is there left to do? Well, I'll tell you: potty training. Certainly important, but it lacks the glamour of walking, and talking. Let's face it, you're never going to get quite the same buzz from, "behold, I am no longer waddling in my own poo!" as you do even from merely being able to say, "behold" in the first place.

And then there's the toys. Go to a toy store, and you'll find plenty of toys for children at 3+ months. Likewise, 6+ and 9+ months are both solidly represented. As is 12+ months, and so too 18+ months.

Then it jumps to 3+ years. All the really good toys are for children of 3 and over. But for the two-year-old? Nothing.

So, one has the choice: does one purchase a toy suitable for a child of 18+ months (which, frankly, seems rather young even for a child of 18 months, never mind 2 years), or does one ignore the guidelines, and go for a 3+ years toy?

Well, the answer, actually, is that you can't do the latter. While the parents can elect to ignore the guidelines, knowing the capabilities of their child (and, perhaps more importantly, the risks they are willing to expose their child to), the well-meaning uncle can't really make that call.

And so, not only does the two-year-old only have a rather mediocre year of intermittent non-poofulness to look forward to, but they also get a haul of fairly lame toys as gifts.

No wonder they're tetchy!