M'Kyuun

My only gripe about this movie is that it was originally plugged as being rooted in G1. The only three things it has in common with the original show are 1. some characters transform from vehicles to robots, 2. trademarked names, and 3. the Prime character is a "Mack" truck, but not the cabover design most of us relate to. I was excited about this movie when I first heard of its pending production. My excitement waned when Spielberg was set to produce, as I loathe movies targeted at prepubescents. Having seen some of the alleged production shots and read various forums, I'm saddened at the direction this movie is headed. My nostalgia is strong for G1, and a live-action retelling of the original story would have been great for us old-timers and newbies alike, which is what I expected based on early comments from the producers. Had they just said in the beginning that they were re-inventing the franchise for a new generation, I would have been fine with the changes. With lowered expectations at the forefront, I'll still stand in line waiting for it. Hopefully, the special effects will make up for the child-targeted script and neo-violent war-mongering amongst the mechanical cast.

Yep, it's lanky, but I still love the way it looks. Considering it's an extreme kitbash of a fighter model cum perfect-variable battroid, I get emotional every time I see it. The biggest nitpick I have with it is the overlong under-panel the nosecone sits on in battroid. If they could have cut it down to agree with the edges of the chest piece, it would have looked much better. I never looked too hard at the face, so I'll take your word.

I definitely concede your point that this is the sleekest YF-19 design ever produced in a toy. However, I still prefer the Hasegawa model for their depiction of the fighter. A matter of opinion. Consulting my Macross Design Works, the fuselage containing the nose gear bay should only extend to slightly below the mid-point of the inside leading edge of the intake. The fuselage should arch mildly under the cockpit, and the nose should be slightly longer. The chines should curve inboard, giving a slight hourglass appearance when viewed from above. These are the characteristics I'd like to see. Looking at my MDW, Kawamori-san leaves somewhat to be desired in the area of consistency, esp when viewing different angles of the YF-19. Things have a tendency to shift slightly to provide a pleasing aesthetic, regardless of mode. And, like most fans, I'm nit-picky. It's only b/c I care. Still, his are some of my favorite mecha designs. His love of aircraft and remarkable ability to design a transformable sequence within the parameters of that design are manifest, and still unparalleled. I have my opinion, Graham, but you have far more experience and expertise concerning Macross Valks. I'll gladly take your word that what we're getting is going to amaze us. <<shovels in a heaping helping of humble pie>> Oh, and I mistakenly referred to the YF-19 as "Excalibur" in my previous post. It bore the code name "Alpha 1" in M+, if memory serves.

I usually hold my comments and enjoy all of yours, but as it's the YF-19 that started my love of Macross, I'm really hoping that this is as well done as the 1/48 VF-1 and the VF-0, both of which are incredible feats of engineering in a transformable toy. Upon first seeing the lineart, I cringed at the fat underbelly, short nose, lack of curves and sleekness. To me, the YF-19 is all about sleekness. She's a fine lady, and should be afforded her rightful curves and profile. To my eyes, the new improved design seems to share the 1/72's forward section with a redesigned aft body. Although it suffers some inconsistencies with the lineart, I had very much hoped that if Yamato had ever decided to produce a new YF-19, they'd base it on Hasegawa's modified, nearly perfect-variable model( the one with YF-19 paint scheme and non-removeable, retracting LG). Even the LS YF-19 is curvier and sleeker in fighter. Yamato has proven themselves capable of staying very true to the fighters' designs, while striking a very agreeable balance between battroid aesthetics and articulation. However, I know they have to start with something and progress to a final model, so I look at my VF-0 and hope for the same treatment for our long-awaited Excalibur. As an afterthought, though it's a little detracting, I'm willing to accept a more prominant uni-boob to achieve a prettier fighter. Both LS and Hasegawa designs featured a rather prominant mammary, but I see it as an acceptable shortfall to the battroid, and I generally favor B-mode over the F and G modes. My $.02

Yamato owns me, or my paycheck rather. Hoping the drool doesn't short out my laptop as I write this. Does anyone know if anyone's still taking preorders...I missed the HLJ boat.

The model was designed and mostly constructed by a guy named Erik Varzegi as the promotional centerpiece of the Lego company's Episode III exhibit. I forget which convention. The model is glued and is suspended on a metal bar that runs nearly the entire length of the model. No special custom pieces were made...it is all stock Lego parts one can find in the various sets. Obviously, not every Lego set has the same parts, and the Lego company has greatly expanded its pallette to somewhere between 4-6 thousand parts. Most parts are designed with multiple uses in mind, and there are many talented builders out there who have used parts brilliantly in ways one would not expect. For example, the exhaust nozzles on the UCS X-Wing Fighter set were made from flower vase pieces designed for one of the girl based themes. On a personal note, to the winner, I laud his altruism, and hope it extends to both the poor to whom his money shall inevitably go, and also to the Lego community who I think would very much enjoy seeing the ship make its rounds to the many Lego conventions held around the world. If the guy can afford 20k for a Lego model, I believe traveling and shipping expenses would seem a paltry sum.

It's called Lego Factory, a free downloadable program. I've tried it, but there are still many limitations; however, it is still relatively new, and improvements are being made all the time. The beauty of it is that one can create whatever he wants, within the parameters of the parts pallette, colors, and part-to-part fit properties. Once these are expanded, I think it will be one of their best marketing tools; after all, who wouldn't like to design their own stuff and have the parts for that custom set sent directly to them. It's a great way to get some of the more rare parts that are expensive to purchase on Bricklink, an international online Lego marketplace. Too, the better designs, if approved by the company, will be made into actual sets. I believe 8 have already found their way onto toy shelves, albeit in combined form. As far as Lego not fueling imagination, and the possibility of their running out of ideas, I disagree. The mecha theme is a new one, and one that has only been tried before in the Life on Mars sets, which I liked. I think there are still alot of themes left to explore: an oil drilling platform would make an interesting set, although the political implications may be cause for refrain. Such a shame that politics can even affect toys. Grrrr And as was mentioned, the Creator theme was designed with the consumer's imagination as the primary driver for building, although a main model, and subsequent secondary models are also featured. And if one desires, plain old buckets of Lego blocks with no main model are still available. IMHO, it is still the best of all toys, as with a bit of money and applied imagination, it can be any toy one desires. I hope to illustrate this soon with a little project I'm working on. Til then, check out Brickshelf.com. Too, Google Lego Mecha Hall of Fame(LMHoF) sometime. You may be surprised.

As did I. Lego has come along way since the 80's. After acquiring the Star Wars license in 1999, the company has revolutionized the way it creates models, as well as introducing poseability and motion into them. They have lightened their non-violence stance as is evidenced in the Alpha Team, Dino Attack, Knight's Kingdom, Vikings, and even Bionicle. Even during the early 90's, the Pirates and Imperial sets featured cannons and cutlasses. I don't think the Lego Group will be producing any United Nations sets any time soon.

Caught the pics thread from awhile back, but haven't heard anything new, and I'm pretty excited to lay my hands on Yamato's latest valk. I love my 1/48s, and I'm looking forward to the refinements in the basic design, as I understand it is very similar to the VF-1, longer cockpit and heatshield configuration notwithstanding.

I do blame them, I worked in retail, if the parents cannot open their eyes to a child's problem, then it is their fault. If parents cannot be mature and responsible enough to take care of their child, why did they have kids in the first place? I gotta admit for those that do have a problem with children not based by environment, but within the child mentally or psychologically (not caused by the entertainment industry or parental behavior), I can't blame them for that. um retailers respect the ESRB, however, we do not police customers, it breaks their ammendment right to privacy. We just warn them. Times have changed, and I see the parents do buy these games and understand the difference, because most of them are my age or older. Parents are informed enough to know what titles are being bought and do ask questions. One of the many reason for that is because they are playing into the parents fear. You need a way to control the kids actions and the government has found a way by releasing the responsibility of morality away from the parents and imposed it on a law. (I gotta read 1984 again.... 1+1=3) Yes, kids will play the games any means necessary, the only way to break most of these is to ensure to take away their source of entertainment, be there when they are playing games, play the games with them, reduce the amount of time being played, question their taste in games, and ask if they understand the difference between reality and fantasy. 335098[/snapback] IMHO, I think the kids and even adults who act out violence harbor the tendency, and will carry out violent deeds with or without the influence of games. Violence is inherent in our psychology, esp in males. History, regardless of age or society teaches us that. I see games as a stress reliever, an escape, where one can vicariously act out without doing actual harm to anyone. I think this is the case for most people who play violent games...the game fills the "need", for lack of a better term. The people that take these actions into the real world and visit their fantasies on others will or would have done so regardless. Ultimately, we've seen various media blamed for the violent or just stupid (ala "Jackass" series and movie) actions of some people. The blame rests on the individual. The only exception I see in this is if the violent person has a mental illness or retardation sufficient to limit his moral judgment. Should parents let kids play games of this nature? Probably not, but every kid is different and the parents should understand their child's maturity, personality, and social influences, and make the call. There are a lot of good kids playing violent games who have never committed any violent act. It's unfair to punish the many for the sins of the few...which is one of the things that irks me to no end about the military, but that's another discussion. In the end, I think retailers should respect and follow the laws already in place, parents should do what they can to at least know what their kids are up to( it IS difficult these days..I'm not a parent myself, but I work with alot of them, and my sister has a kid and a stepson, who plays violent games and is a great kid), and society should stop coddling those who do carry out violent crimes and punish them with greater, more character building punishments...turning big rocks into little rocks worked well for a lot of years. My final thought is that if everyone who played violent games, watched violent movies, or listened to violent music acted these things out, we'd have an international epidemic of uncontrollable violence...but I think basically most of us just want a nice quiet killing spree letting the photons and pixels fall where they may.

Definitely, some may contest to the belief that the vf-0 is a prototype platform of new technologies that the vf-1 might implement in their production but will never be introduced because of cost factor which in a realistic standpoint is possible. This happens all the time from x-planes to futuristic car prototypes. 314735[/snapback] Way to cover for timeline inconsistencies! I agree wholeheartedly...companies cut corners all the time due to design, material, and manufacturing costs. Applied to the VF-0 and VF-1, Mr. Kawamori most likely designed the Zero as a larger, bumpier fighter so as to emphasize the more streamlined, compact design of the VF-1. It makes sense. What I do like on the VF-0 over the Vf-1 is the chining, contemporary angled panels, and the head design. Both are great designs, and deserve shelf space.

I gotta disagree with the upgrade part man. The canopy is more bulbous, the plane is bigger, has "interim" engines that are not as reliable as the VF-1 engines, (much like the TF-30 on the F-14A ...until the FINALLY got the long awaited more reliable much more powerful GEF110), has more drag, has a normal HUD, heavier, and possibly slower due to drag and weight. The VF-1 has glass canopy HUD, more reliable engines, sleeker, less drag, more advanced transformation(though not by much), more armor options, and looks more aerodynamically sound...seriously the VF-0 to VF-1 to me is like comparing an F-15 to an F-22. The VF-0 is the bridge between the gap of the modern fighter and variable fighter. But hell I'm a sucker for vintage fighters...and the VF-0 looks vintage and badass to me. 314467[/snapback] Shin, Dude, you definitely know your specs, and most certainly the VF-1 is a superior aircraft; however, my comment was merely aimed at the VF-0's appearance, i.e, angled panels, panel lines, exhausts, etc. all created to give a contemporary "stealth" appearance inherent in nearly every American fighter/ bomber since the F-117. Since stealth technology was still deep black when Shoji Kawamori designed the VF-1 back in the early 80's, he did not incorporate those external features into that particular design. Thus, in my mind, it was an upgrade in design from only an aesthetic point of view. To a non-Macross fan who knows anything about military planes, the VF-1 looks dated next to the more contemporary looking VF-0. However in all other respects, the VF-1 is the better design. Thanks for the comments; guess I needed to clarify my position. Also, personally I love both designs, although the VF-0 gains points with me for the reasons stated above. It's all about the angles, man!!!!!

I'm for the SV-51. Despite its spindly appearance, it represents something new and different, which interests me. While I like the VF-0, to me it is just a VF-1 upgraded to today's aircraft aesthetics, making it prettier in my opinion, than the VF-1, but still basically a VF-1 by transformation and basic look. I wish Mr. Kawamori had put a little more imagination into the VF-1's predecessor, making it a unique transforming design. Alas, it's his baby. I'm just glad Yamato still shows interest in the license, and I will most likely add a VF-0 to my collection should they produce them. And yes, Graham, the "needle" on the front is a pitot tube used to indicate airspeed(I work on planes for the USAF)

I'm a rather eclectic collector, but not really a completist. I buy what I like, and my interests, though many, are primarily Lego( which I've been collecting nonstop since 1975, or thereabout, and for which I am rapidly running out of storage ), Star Wars figures and Lego sets(of course, 'cause they're awesome), Transformers (Takara MP Prime and the Binaltech line are, IMHO, what Takara should have been making all along, but I digress), and transformable Valkyries, esp Yammies. Since my folks were never sci-fi fans, much to my chagrin, I never got into collecting SW until Hasbro started releasing figures in 1995. I haven't stopped since, and I have a respectable collection, though far from complete, of MISB figures. Sorry no pics...almost everything outside of my Lego mess is boxed or wrapped up in plastic to keep it nice for the day when I finally own a house with lots and lots of shelves to display everything.

I'll admit, choice of car's what got me. The xB just makes me skin crawl.

13 Years USAF, aircraft hydraulics specialist, currently serving at Fairchild AFB, WA

Hi everyone. I've been following these forums for years, but i felt content to just kick back and enjoy the banter...until today. I also dig transformable bikes(the more realistic, the better), but still like the stuff in general. Keeping within the topic, I found something interesting while perusing the Microman section of the Takara-USA website. It's more along the lines of ride-armor than transformable, but apropos nonetheless. As an aside, I bought a Microman Batman, which is a similar figure in the line. This thing is only approx 4" tall, but features something like 30 points of articulation and some decent detailing. GI-Joes everywhere are hiding their little plastic heads in shame. Anyway, take a look if it sounds interesting. http://www.takara-usa.com/microman/inf_mf_01.html