There are certain debates that run in fandoms, sometimes for decades.
Star Wars: Why didn’t Anakin’s rich princess girlfriend ever buy Anakin’s mother out of slavery for him, and why when he was a powerful Jedi did he wait so long to go back for her?
Star Trek: How was it Kirk could spend decades surviving every danger in the galaxy, even getting into a fight with God, yet was killed by a rickety bridge on some backwards planet?
Harry Potter: If Voldermort had no nose, how did he smell?
In the 1986 film The Transformers: The Movie, amongst numerous other animation errors, there was at one point two of Cyclonus. One seeming to be reformatted from Bombshell, the other from Skywarp. The second Cyclonus (sometimes called ‘Armada’) quickly disappeared.
So fans have been arguing for decades – Who became Cyclonus? Bombshell or Skywarp?
Well truth be told, there is no real answer. In the original script, just like how Scourge (reformatted from Thundercracker) had a slew of identical looking bots to him called The Sweeps, so the script called for there to be multiple bots that looked like Cyclonus.
This idea was dropped from the script, but not before the animation had been produced and included, which resulted in there being two of Cyclonus on screen.
So no, there is no official answer. It’s an animation error, plain and simple.
So perhaps the question should be. Which bot does it make more sense for to be turned into Cyclonus – Bombshell or Skywarp?
Some fans argue vehemently that it should be Bombshell as he was the closer one to screen during the reformatting. Bombshell was most prominent, so therefore it should be Bombshell. There have also been a few pieces of ancillary media, such as the Transformers Universe comic and a 2003 video game that state Bombshell became Cyclonus.
But at this risk of irritating these fans, and thus reigniting a geek-war which has never truly died, I argue that it should be Skywarp. In fact, I argue that Bombshell should not even be considered as it makes more sense for it to have been an Insecticon Clone. Let’s look at why.
Vehicle Symmetry
Thundercracker, the blue jet, was reformatted into Scourge, a blue Cybertronian flying craft. Therefore it makes sense for Skywarp, the black jet with purple accents, to be reformatted into Cyclonus, a purple Cybertronian flying craft.
Toy placement
In the 1985 catalog there were 6 Decepticon jets, Starscream, Dirge, Ramjet, Thrust, Skywarp and Thundercracker. In the 1986 catalog, Skywarp and Thundercracker were replaced with Cyclonus and Scourge.
Loyalty
Skywarp was never shown to betray Megatron, whereas the Insecticons were famous for it. Cyclonus is intensely loyal to Galvatron, showing none of the disloyalty the Insecticons did.
DVD Releases
In several DVD releases of the movie, in special features it states that Skywarp becomes Cyclonus.
Japanese Continuity
Unlike with many western audiences, the Japanese take on the continuity has always been relatively free of debate. Indeed in the story Macrocosmic Seekers Cyclonus regresses and rediscovers the teleportation ability he once possessed as Skywarp. The bio for the latest Masterpiece Skywarp also states that he eventually becomes Cyclonus.
Replication
The Insecticons Clones have been shown to replicate. The Sweeps are also assumed to replicate, since no matter how many get destroyed (only 3 were initially created by Unicron in the movie) there always seems to be more. In the episode ‘Call of the Primitives’ one is heard to say ‘Sweeps 6 & 7 coming in for a strike’. Skywarp had a teleportation ability, not a cloning ability, so it makes no sense for him to have become a Sweep.
InsectiClones, not InsectiCons.
To muddy the waters even more, in my opinion, it makes much more sense for it to have been Insecticon Clones rather than the original trio. This is based on the Insecticons showing up further in the movie at later stages, as well as season 3 of the cartoon. Since Insecticon clones have never been shown to exist without in some way being connected to their projinators, it makes sense that it was Clones, not the Insecticons themselves that were reformatted. This again ties into the idea that this is why the Sweeps can replicate. From a sales standpoint, the Insecticons were still being sold in 1986, whereas Thundercracker and Skywarp had been discontinued, so it makes sense for the characters to have not been killed off before thier toys were.
Now I am aware that there are counterarguments to much of what I have cited, such as S3 of the cartoon is infamous for its animation errors. Kickback was shown getting gravely injured by Kup, so it only makes sense for him to have been thrown out of Astrotrain etc. Skywarp was way off in the background, so he is the one that became ‘Armada’. I’m sure a dedicated fan with some spare time could pick holes in much of what I have said. Like mentioned earlier, remember – there is no real answer, the whole debate is based on an animation error in a 38 year old movie designed to sell toys!
But Cyclonus becoming Skywarp? That makes the most sense to me 😉
Do you agree, or are you adamant that it was Bombshell that became Cyclonus? State your theory in the comments section below!