How do you Batman vs Superman? I show you! at 5:26 AM

Superheroes be like

There are characters and concepts out there, that are difficult to adapt, especially into a mainstream movie. Works that are too long, too morally complex, or too visually advanced for any old  person to present on screen.

Works that, once adapted, are always controversial.

Batman and Superman are the opposite of that.

Batman and Superman are the Easy Mode of works to adapt. Really, the narrative difficult parts have already been taken care of for you. Literally everyone and their grandma knows this characters, and they've been fleshed for over 75 years, on just about every medium imaginable, including streams of films.

"If anything, Superman Returns was not dark and meandering and melancholy ENOUGH."

But, according to certain spoiler laden reviews, somehow I have to explain to Zack Snyder and WB how to bring together Batman and Superman. Spoilers follow.

In a way, it's not so surprising that the studio that couldn't get Green Lantern, Jonah Hex, and Hellblazer, doesn't understand how the whole Batman x Superman thing should work. They only have like decades of comics, and the Bruce Timm animated movie, and Batman/Superman Public Enemies the animation. All works that cultivated the very idea of these characters butting heads. I guess  they didn't see that. They did see Death of Superman and The Dark Knight Returns, which, which are not really stories that make sense to mix with each other. It's X3 all over again. Mutant Cure and Phoenix each could be their own SERIES OF MOVIES, you don't put both together!


Anyway, I'm not reviewing the movie. I haven't seen it. But from the information I have, in this one Batman is angry and kills people and Superman...probably doesn't anymore, a lot. Batman is angry because of what happened in Metropolis(which, in-universe is kind of dickish because while Superman  might have failed to save a lot of people in Metropolis, he did save everyone ELSE in the world from turning into mountains of skulls. So...perspective) and because of that and the manipulations of Lex Luthor, that's what causes the titular boxing match.

In the end, upon being informed  that Superman's mom is called Martha, alike his own Mom, Batman gives up trying to straight up kill Superman, and they and Wonder Woman team up to fight Doomsday, the non-flipper having , revived and remonstered Zod, which kills Superman. Of course he kills Superman, why else would you have that sack of rocky shit if you wern't going to do the whole Death of Superman Tango. Of course, at this point we aren't killing Superman, American Icon for years, beloved by all, the world's greatest Superhero, but Superman, Divisive figure that some call FALSE GOD, and who had to attend senate hearings about his behavior. Even Superman Returns earned  it's "Superman is DEAD" moments.

Hey, as long as we're adapting the less good parts of the DCU...

Ok, director of Watchmen and 300: Here's how this usually goes down.

Batman and Superman have completely different methods of achieving the same thing, as well as entirely different viewpoints of things. Batman is generally more distrusting and cynical, because his entire thing is based on having watched his parents gunned down before him. Also, since he doesn't have Superpowers, he can't just pick up people and throw them in jail.

Superman, though, is basically a humble guy even though he could compress your cranium into diamonds. He is more of an optimist, and his approach to a situation that Batman might approach with Karate tends to be less like that.


So if these two haven't met, there'll be an obvious rift on account of the methodology. If they've already met, there will be some overlying issue that will be big enough to have characters be torn apart.

They'll fight, but not out of spite, for someone must stand up for what's right. But, naturally at some point they'll figure that they both want the same thing: justice, and so they'll squash the beef and make up. Uh, that sounded a little....


ANYWAY, you see, that's usually how it goes when you don't want to assassinate one or the other. If you want to make Superman look like an Super Jerk, you play to the negative perceptions some people have about him: That he's a dullard, boring, hypocrite, status quo loving freak. If you want to make Batman be in the wrong, have him just spy on  everyone and be an paranoid douche.

However, for all the half a decade plans of sequels you got lined up, you forgot to plan the most basic shit: How are Batman and Superman different.

For all the poop pants serious face talks of DESHTINY in Man of Steel, by the end you don't really get a sense of that this is THE Superman. You know, The "Great Icon of Hope" the film kept pushing. Even now in this film, there is allegedly not a sense of that. We never really got back from Pa' Kent if oh so special Clark Kent should leave a bus of schoolchildren to drown. In fact, in Man of Steel, when he kills Zod and he's all broken up about it, you can almost hear Kevin Costner going "you see, Clark, saving the planet...awful business, that."

I'm starting to think WB hired Sandy Corolla as a way to keep him out of Marvel's hands...

So to contrast Morally Ambiguous Superman we have...Morally Ambiguous Batman. EVEN MORE-ERERER morally ambiguous than when he exploded an entire factory or when he lied about and covered the District Attorney's death because Gotham's little heart just couldn't handle the idea that he went on a killing spree, if you can believe it.


So now, rather than Navy Blue, Boy Scout Supes fighting Gray and Black , Scowling Batman facing each other before coming to an understanding based on a new found sense of trust and respect over what good they see in the other we have Blue-Black, Pensive Superman Fighting Rock Gray and Black Batman fighting each other over stupid shit, and coming together over stupid shit long enough to fight Doomsday.

Really, it's all in the visuals.

To clarify, I have not seen the film. I'm sure IF I watch it, it won't be the worst thing I've done. I'm not a snob. I thought MoS was just kind of okay. But just from knowing these plot elements, I am just boggled. I am boggled that in a year when Fox got Deadpool right...FOX...DEADPOOL...RIGHT...that Warner kind of dropped the ball on  pretty much THE only Superheroes they bought DC for. I mean, not financially, the movie's doing good I hear. But, again, it's 2016, and Marvel made a good movie about fucking Antman. You don't get points for showing up, WB and DC.

BGE investigates: Is Batman a huge hippocrite? at 12:39 PM

The Bats are gonna fly toniiiiight! They're wearing Hockey pads, toniiiight!

Batman. Who is this man, and what drives him to do the things he does?

This might be the kinds of nerdy questions that mostly should be answered by "he's not real, jerk," but for 70 years a multitude of artists and writers have  made their livelihood by essaying  into comics, movies, and tv shows  carefully  crafted answers to that question.


While the Bat's personality is a reflection on the artists, the society at the time, and mercenary creative need, most Bat-fans would probably  know the following.

1)Batman is Bruce Wayne, Millionaire Playboy , whose parent's murder as a child drove him to become a vigilante/super hero.
2)Batman does not kill.
3)Batman does not use guns.

You can see fan outrage for those times when Batman kills, or for those rarer still moments when he can be found clutching a handgun. Batman Beyond, an official cartoon depicting  the future of the Animated Series, depicts the moment Bruce decides  to stop being Batman as being one time illness FORCED him to use a gun to scare off a criminal.

So Batman does not use guns. This is an integral part of the character, now.  All he has is his wits and his fists and his gadgets and vehicles. Otherwise his just an ordinary billionaire who engages in regular exercise. You don't see Batman shoot up a place. Except in, like this scene.

In this scene, The Joker is gassing the city, and it's up to Batman to stop him. He does, and then he takes aim from his airship towards the Joker.

The intention is pretty clear, here. Batman is trying to shoot this single man from the sky with the guns in his warplane. While it is pretty dramatically convenient that Batman's aim is so lousy,  Batman's idea here isn't for Joker to do a stint on prison. He's trying to shoot him dead.

Now, being fair, Batman DOESN'T have an established code against killing in that movie, nor an established code against guns, perse. Many fans have gone on to believe that THIS particular Batman is acting severely out of character. REAL Batman wouldn't bomb a building, or burn a man alive with his car's afterburner or throw the Joker off a cathedral to his own death, they'll say.

"Real Batman" might more closely ressemble The Dark Knight Trilogy VERSION, to many of those fans. That one DOES establish Batman has  a reason for not wanting to kill, and a specific aversion to guns. He rejects  killing after his initiation on the league of Shadows involves murdering an accused criminal, and rejects guns after his love interest scolds him for his intention to shoot the man who murdered his parents.

After that, it's nothing but  his wits and his fists and his gadgets and vehicles. And my what vehicles these are! There's the Tumbler, a tank-like military offroad vehicle equiped with jumping action, fiery turbines, missile launchers,  and what appears to be a periscope style overhead machine gun.

Of course, Batman didn't order that made custom. He doesn't need military grade weapons. He's not a killer, guys! He only ever uses the Tumbler's missile capacity to take down  a train.  Further movies, though, establish his continually upgraded fleet includes a motorcycle that detaches itself from the Tumbler. Pretty useful for chasing after the Joker, but as we see here, not as useful for apprehending him.

This scene echoes the earlier scene where  Batman blasted away at the Joker from his high tech plane, except in this scene Batman doesn't blast at the Joker. I mean, with the enormous guns in the Batbike, he'd tear him to pieces. But he can't even manage to run him over, which he seems he kind of wanted to do but doesn't. You know there's a couple of things between running over a man with your motorcycle and just sort of letting him go, right, Batty?

"Okay, lemme explain. This doesn't shoot bullets, it shoots plastic explosives. Totally non-lethal stuff."

And if you're wondering if those are guns, flip over to the ending of Dark Knight Rises, where Catwoman, riding the same model,  explodes a barricade and eventually Bane, the movie's villain. The Batpod isn't just armed with peashooters, it's a fucking war machine.

He's also got "The Bat", a hovering...thing, also armed with  machine guns and explosives.

So what gives, anyway? Am I the only one who has noticed?

The Bathorse is also armed!

Batman's "No GUNS" thing is kind of weirdly structured. On the one hand, Batman outright refuses to even WORK with somebody who's carrying, but sees no objection to having a 50 cal mounted on his Bat Huey.

Most of the same reasons for using firearms are the same kind of reasons for putting them on vehicles. "Guns are for killing, and I don't kill" Well, Batman doesn't have to use guns to straight up murder. He an debilitate  an opponent, scatter a crowd of unarmed thugs.  In the same way he can have machine guns mounted on the hood of his car and not necessarily use that shoot Poison Ivy dead, he can have a handgun in case the situation calls for it.

"Guns are what criminals use!" First of all, YOU'RE a criminal. You're embezzling money from your company, engaging in acts of aggression, driving unsanctioned vehicles and  Second of all, let's be adults here, Batman.  All sorts of people carry guns. Police. Military personnel. Security guards. Civilians who want to defend themselves. I'm not pro-guns  or anything, but it is what it is. It's especially weird to say that in the world of DC when it involves metabeings.  Some of these people can fly and throw blasts out of their hands. I'm sure if you look hard enough in the DC universe, there's a guy whose powers is shooting bullets out of his eyes.

"Guns killed my parents." Yes, the classic trauma. Batman is AVERSE to firearms, and somehow this mental avertion goes away if it's the vehicle he's riding doing the shooting.

But wouldn't the SOUND of the machine guns on the Batmobile trigger back memories of that fateful day?

For such a presumed "important" part of the character, this discrepancy has not yet been tackled. In fact, Arcades all over the continent are filling up with Batman: The Arcade Game, a game that lets you choose from MOST of the popular Batmobiles, and allows you to shoot up the streets as you try to stop Bane, Mr Freeze and The Joker.  While some of this vehicles never actually shot anything on their original version, this game allows it like it's the most natural thing in the world.



So pick one, Bats. Either never guns, or sometimes guns.

Dear Autobots: An intervention at 10:51 AM

"YOU LIED TO US!" "On our defense, here's an astronaut who traveled all the way to the moon." "THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!!"

I just want to say, that I love you. Well, not love-love, but I did have a fun time watching your first two movies, even if it doesn't make sense that Megatron can fly to a distant planet in a day. Even if your potty-humor seems entirely out of play and your robots curse. I like you.

I brought you here because I saw your new trailer, and I want to say, you have a problem, and I'm not talking about an in-story conflict that needs resolution to deliver catharsis, either. You see, the theme of this trailer, as it where, is that the U.S. government betrayed you. Or rather, that you betrayed yourselves using the U.S. government.

Because I have seen your movies, and in every single one, the Government of the United Stated has been fucking you up your robot asses, possibly litterally in Bumblebee's case.  In movie one they captured and tortured him in a secret base, after all. In movie two they used you for their own personal benefit, and then failed to assist you when your leader died. In movie 3 they straight up sold you to your enemies.

So when movie 4's trailer indicates that the US is again  hurting you, it's not so much a disturbing scenario, but the 2nd direct to DVD sequel to the fable of the Scorpion and the Frog; no cause for surprise.  Autobots cannot continue to be in this horrible relationship with the American Government. I know that their military resources are necessary to maintain your campaign against the Decepticons (and indeed, the intake of cash of this franchise). Most people in abusive relationships are willing to  stay in them, as long as they don't have to depart certain benefits of them.  But you guys can make it on your own.

Lou Diamond Phillips is now the Frog.

In your cartoons, you guys are perfectly able to fend off most of your enemies most of the time. Maybe the silver lining to staying away form the U.S. government would be that you'd get to be more like that: Maybe this time you'd get to be the heroes of your story, instead of  Shia Lebouf, Josh Duhamel, Jon Voight, Mark Whalberg, and Ednik Stero-type. Maybe next movie we could get a look at how the 'Bots relate to each other.

I cannot continue to watch you hurt yourselfs. Certainly not while paying full price for a ticket. Please. You need help...but you can do this without the air force. We don't want to see Transformers constantly put up with government abuse while in constant admiration of the Armed Forces, Michael Bay  Autobots.

Dear Autobots: An intervention at 10:51 AM

"YOU LIED TO US!" "On our defense, here's an astronaut who traveled all the way to the moon." "THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!!"

I just want to say, that I love you. Well, not love-love, but I did have a fun time watching your first two movies, even if it doesn't make sense that Megatron can fly to a distant planet in a day. Even if your potty-humor seems entirely out of play and your robots curse. I like you.

I brought you here because I saw your new trailer, and I want to say, you have a problem, and I'm not talking about an in-story conflict that needs resolution to deliver catharsis, either. You see, the theme of this trailer, as it where, is that the U.S. government betrayed you. Or rather, that you betrayed yourselves using the U.S. government.

Because I have seen your movies, and in every single one, the Government of the United Stated has been fucking you up your robot asses, possibly litterally in Bumblebee's case.  In movie one they captured and tortured him in a secret base, after all. In movie two they used you for their own personal benefit, and then failed to assist you when your leader died. In movie 3 they straight up sold you to your enemies.

So when movie 4's trailer indicates that the US is again  hurting you, it's not so much a disturbing scenario, but the 2nd direct to DVD sequel to the fable of the Scorpion and the Frog; no cause for surprise.  Autobots cannot continue to be in this horrible relationship with the American Government. I know that their military resources are necessary to maintain your campaign against the Decepticons (and indeed, the intake of cash of this franchise). Most people in abusive relationships are willing to  stay in them, as long as they don't have to depart certain benefits of them.  But you guys can make it on your own.

Lou Diamond Phillips is now the Frog.

In your cartoons, you guys are perfectly able to fend off most of your enemies most of the time. Maybe the silver lining to staying away form the U.S. government would be that you'd get to be more like that: Maybe this time you'd get to be the heroes of your story, instead of  Shia Lebouf, Josh Duhamel, Jon Voight, Mark Whalberg, and Ednik Stero-type. Maybe next movie we could get a look at how the 'Bots relate to each other.

I cannot continue to watch you hurt yourselfs. Certainly not while paying full price for a ticket. Please. You need help...but you can do this without the air force. We don't want to see Transformers constantly put up with government abuse while in constant admiration of the Armed Forces, Michael Bay  Autobots.

5 Fighting game characters that should have retired already at 12:13 PM

There is life after round 3.

Fighting game tournaments are not like real life tournaments. Whereas in real life most of the people who compete do so for sport and train for it yearly, character stories in videogames need to be outlandish things full of good vs evil, revenge, and sometimes runaway brides. Those who say that fighting games have no stories really do a disservice to how committed the makers are for giving Mark Joe a reason to be in Mark of Punches 5.

 But in giving characters a motivation, sometimes it clashes with the fact that regardless of the ending, the character will probably come back at some point. If you stick with a fighting game franchise long enough, you will see every character come back at least once, regardless of how resolved their plot arcs are or how dead they where last time. But some of these characters fullfilled their reason to join the tournament years ago. And yet, here they are, still trading blows. Who are this guys?

Tina Armstrong(Dead or Alive)

Tina is one of my favorite characters from this franchise, with her lighthearted personality and enormous breasts. However, her motivation has been weird from the start. And this is from a series that has a character that is trying to defeat a guy who saved her once.

See, Tina is a wrestler, but she doesn't want to be a wrestler. She wants to be in show business. So she gets into the tournament to get enough money to do so.

Can you two let me talk?

Now, let's pretend in this world wrestling isn't staged.  But  the tricky thing is, at the end of each game, Tina succeeds into  getting  into different aspects of show business, while not winning the tournament at all. Which makes no sense. If she breaks into modeling in game 1, why would she need to fight in another tournament to break into acting? If Dwayne"The Rock" Johnson wanted to become a singer, would he have to participate in a tournament, too? No, silly, he's already in!

And if winning was key to her goal, why can she still achieve it even though canonically, she lost?

This is why the movie changed her motivation to the less stupid "I want out of fake wrestling."  And it's always sad when fighting game movies actually make sense of the games.



Sentinel(MVC3)

Sentinel, buddy: come here a minute. I know you started in  a game that was mostly mutants. You hunt those. It's your job. And then you came back in Marvel vs Capcom 2. You where a little broken, but I guess all the mutants where there, so it made sense. If you had to fight Strider and Megaman, well, that's just fine.

If he wasn't a mutant, he probably heard about them.

But why are you in Marvel vs Capcom 3? No, DON'T tell me about your fruit palette shenanigans. In this game there's like 3 X-Gene mutants and arguably two more technical mutants.

And no wonder, man! Last I  heard, Mutants without ongoing comic appearances where extinct. Even Jubilee's a vampire now. Maybe you should hunt vampires and quit this "fighitng game" business. You're not good at it anyway.



Balrog(Street Fighter)

Unlike everyone else in the Street Fighter universe, Balrog is in it for the money. He works for a terrorist in  a military uniform and punches people to death. For the money. But is this paying off?

See, everytime a Street Fighter game ends, Bison is defeated. Well, except if he wins I guess.

I would also guess that Balrog probably goes to jail, or escapes somehow. But why? Does Bison pay ahead, and  is the money that good? And how much money does one  really need that going back to fight Foodtown Bruce Lee and Pink Ryu is worth it?

It's time to retire, Balrog.  If you must fight, then fight. You don't need Shadaloo. And Shadaloo sure as hell doen't need you.

Seung Mina(Soul Calibur)

Seung Mina is a young Korean woman who wants Soul Edge because she doesn't want to get married off by her family and also to defend her country. So she runs away to search for the sword.

Am I missing something, here, lady? YOU RAN AWAY FROM HOME! You don't need to  depend on your parents anymore. Sure, you can't join the Korean Army because you're a gurl, but you could always just join the battle or pull a Mulan.

As for the marriage...well, problem solved. You ran away from home! Just stay away from home and that's it.
You don't need a magic sword, you just need some follow through. It's obvious you're self sufficient if you're traveling to some other country and fighting Ivy.

I think she'll do just fine.

 The thing about Mina is, we don't know if she's back in the series newest, decades after the fact timejump. But I'm guessing she'll be back.


Scorpion(Mortal Kombat)

You could argue that Scorpion is probably Mortal Kombat's most known character. Yet the demonic undead Ninja hasn't had a real reason to fight in years.


See, at first it was revenge for the death of his family as well as himself. And he got it. He killed the guy. Then the guy's brother showed up, dressed the same. This lead to a hilarious misunderstanding that lasted  several games and a spinoff. Finally, in Mortal Kombat 4, he finally caught up with the guy, but He wasn't the killer, this other magic motherfucker was to blame. So he dragged that guy to Hell.

GET OVER IIIIIIIIT!

After that, Scorpion's motivation started to get muddy. He chased the guy out of hell, became a conduit for the Elder Gods, then decided to get revenge against the Gods. Come on, Scorpion, kill the guy and rest in fucking peace already!


Oh, wait, time got reversed?  Well, back to hunting the brother of the guy who killed you then, I guess?

5 Fighting game characters that should have retired already at 12:13 PM

There is life after round 3.

Fighting game tournaments are not like real life tournaments. Whereas in real life most of the people who compete do so for sport and train for it yearly, character stories in videogames need to be outlandish things full of good vs evil, revenge, and sometimes runaway brides. Those who say that fighting games have no stories really do a disservice to how committed the makers are for giving Mark Joe a reason to be in Mark of Punches 5.

 But in giving characters a motivation, sometimes it clashes with the fact that regardless of the ending, the character will probably come back at some point. If you stick with a fighting game franchise long enough, you will see every character come back at least once, regardless of how resolved their plot arcs are or how dead they where last time. But some of these characters fullfilled their reason to join the tournament years ago. And yet, here they are, still trading blows. Who are this guys?

Tina Armstrong(Dead or Alive)

Tina is one of my favorite characters from this franchise, with her lighthearted personality and enormous breasts. However, her motivation has been weird from the start. And this is from a series that has a character that is trying to defeat a guy who saved her once.

See, Tina is a wrestler, but she doesn't want to be a wrestler. She wants to be in show business. So she gets into the tournament to get enough money to do so.

Can you two let me talk?

Now, let's pretend in this world wrestling isn't staged.  But  the tricky thing is, at the end of each game, Tina succeeds into  getting  into different aspects of show business, while not winning the tournament at all. Which makes no sense. If she breaks into modeling in game 1, why would she need to fight in another tournament to break into acting? If Dwayne"The Rock" Johnson wanted to become a singer, would he have to participate in a tournament, too? No, silly, he's already in!

And if winning was key to her goal, why can she still achieve it even though canonically, she lost?

This is why the movie changed her motivation to the less stupid "I want out of fake wrestling."  And it's always sad when fighting game movies actually make sense of the games.

Horrendous Theory: Optimus Prime is EVIL at 7:54 AM

You can trust this attempt at a face!

Now, I'm not much of a Transformer G1 fan. Was way more into Beast Wars. But don't you guys find that in the movie's Optimus is a bit...ruthless?

I began noticing in Revenge of the Fallen.  The first action sequence ends with Optimus having this exchange with a maimed and defenseless Decepticon.

Optimus Prime: Any last words?
Wheelbot: This is not your planet to rule! The Fallen shall rise again!
Chief Master Sergeant Epps: [puzzled] That did not sound good.
Optimus Prime: Not today.
[blasts Wheelbot in the head]

"Any last words" is what a character, usually a villain, says when he's about to execute a person. It indicates that what follows is a clear path for the would be victim: "There is no possibility I won't kill you, you are given a final chance to mark our lives before you die." It is troubling that what we assume is a good guy chooses this words. See, in movies, usually the good guys don't "execute"  their villains. They defeat them in combat, either on equal grounds or with the hero at a disadvantage. Normally heroes aren't given the choice of whether or not to kill, and if your good guy is...say, a cartoon icon for children, usually the choice is to let them live.

Why don't you guys learn from the masters?

Second, it really looks like Wheelbot is implying Optimus Prime could be interpreted as to want to rule the earth. This is strange. Why would he think that? Why, of all the words you could put into that robot's spiked mouth, would you put concern that Optimus would rule the earth? Is Optimus the leader of Cybertron or something? Aren't the Decepticons the randomly chaotic ones? Why won't Optimus even deny he won't  take over the earth?

In any case, after several minutes of  Dog humpin, jive talking, Shia Leboufing action, the climax of the film takes place.  And after that, Optimus Prime fights The Fallen and Megatron. Optimus  handles both with ease. And then this happens.

Optimus, again, being a big fan of fatalities, chooses to rip off his opponent's face while saying : "Give ME YOR FACE!"

Now, we like our heroes to mix it up with the killing and making with one liners. But this isn't a Bond pun. This isn't  I lied.
It's not funny or ironic or set up to or a joke. He's saying he will rip his face off. And then he does.

If they where human...this would be a war crime.

Of course, he's just an evil robot who had it, coming you might say. But what purpose does it serve to rip your opponent's facial expressions as you execute them?   What kind of psycho rips away  someone else's face? Is our hero on the same league as  Leatherface and that Chimp that went crazy?

Autobuts, transform and roll out!

And lastly, there's Cry for the Moon Bark at the Moon In the Dark of the Night Dark of the Moon. I haven't seen it, but I have it on good authority Optimus Prime and the Autobots actually let  a city be laid to waste and countless humans die just to teach humanity a lesson. Yes, a lesson.


In the context in which it is offered to me, I heard humans order the Autobots to leave earth , in order to try and negotiate an armistice with their enemies, the Decepticons. Quickly the Decepticons  try to kill the Autobots and lay waste to a city after apparently blowing them up murdering humans all willy nilly, straight up hunting them and exterminating them.


While everyone thinks the Autobots are dead, they eventually come back. But not before Optimus points out they took their sweet time because humans had to understand how evil this evil robots are.

Yeah, I get it now! Go with the colored robots, not the gray robots! Got it!

And again, I haven't seen it, but doesn't that sound like a shrewd political move? You create sympathy and necessity for Autobots when Decepticon's top most powerful leader already had his face removed and his ticker raped, and as I hear by the end of this movie , all the bad guys have died. WHat's the lesson here again?  Don't fuck with Optimus?

Saviors? Buddy, you just got false flagged. Optimus' rise to power is at hand.

Horrendous Theory: Optimus Prime is EVIL at 7:54 AM

You can trust this attempt at a face!

Now, I'm not much of a Transformer G1 fan. Was way more into Beast Wars. But don't you guys find that in the movie's Optimus is a bit...ruthless?

I began noticing in Revenge of the Fallen.  The first action sequence ends with Optimus having this exchange with a maimed and defenseless Decepticon.

Optimus Prime: Any last words?
Wheelbot: This is not your planet to rule! The Fallen shall rise again!
Chief Master Sergeant Epps: [puzzled] That did not sound good.
Optimus Prime: Not today.
[blasts Wheelbot in the head]

"Any last words" is what a character, usually a villain, says when he's about to execute a person. It indicates that what follows is a clear path for the would be victim: "There is no possibility I won't kill you, you are given a final chance to mark our lives before you die." It is troubling that what we assume is a good guy chooses this words. See, in movies, usually the good guys don't "execute"  their villains. They defeat them in combat, either on equal grounds or with the hero at a disadvantage. Normally heroes aren't given the choice of whether or not to kill, and if your good guy is...say, a cartoon icon for children, usually the choice is to let them live.

Why don't you guys learn from the masters?