Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Welcome to BZPower!

Hi there, while we hope you enjoy browsing through the site, there's a lot more you can do if you register. The process is easy and you can use your Google, Facebook, or Twitter account to make it even faster. Some perks of joining include:
  • Create your own topics, participate in existing discussions, and vote in polls
  • Show off your creations, stories, art, music, and movies and play member and staff-run games
  • Enter contests to win free LEGO sets and other prizes, and vote to decide the winners
  • Participate in raffles, including exclusive raffles for new members, and win free LEGO sets
  • Send private messages to other members
  • Organize with other members to attend or send your MOCs to LEGO fan events all over the world
  • Much, much more!
Enjoy your visit!

Photo

Mata Nui or Toa Mata Nui

toa mata nui canon set titan

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Offline NuvaTube

NuvaTube
  • Members
  • Toa

  • 05-March 13
  • 132 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 01:28 PM

Quick question:

 

Which set is more canonically accurate, "Mata Nui" or "Toa Mata Nui"? They depict the same character which is Toa sized, but which is more accurate to what he's actually meant to look like?

 

I guess because there are more depictions of the canister "Mata Nui" set, that's more canon, but I don't know. 


  • 0

#2 Online Chro

Chro
  • Members
  • Defender of Mata Nui

  • 07-August 12
  • 2,127 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 01:43 PM

I think the titan one (which is Toa Mata Nui, I think) is non-canon, so the regular Glatorian one (just Mata Nui) would be more accurate.


  • 0

"I guess you can't kill what's already dead."


#3 Offline XONAR

XONAR
  • Premier Member
    BioniLUG Member
  • Premier Outstanding BZP Citizens
  • Descending into Protodermis

  • 04-January 13
  • 936 posts
  •   Outstanding BZPower Citizen

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 01:49 PM

I think the titan one (which is Toa Mata Nui, I think) is non-canon, so the regular Glatorian one (just Mata Nui) would be more accurate.

 

*cough*keplers*cough* 

 

Yeah, the Toa Mata Nui set is in no way canon. Their non-canon explanation for it was that this was the form he took to face Tuma, I think. 


  • 0
Posted Image

#4 Offline NuvaTube

NuvaTube
  • Members
  • Toa

  • 05-March 13
  • 132 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 01:55 PM

 

I think the titan one (which is Toa Mata Nui, I think) is non-canon, so the regular Glatorian one (just Mata Nui) would be more accurate.

 

*cough*keplers*cough* 

 

Yeah, the Toa Mata Nui set is in no way canon. Their non-canon explanation for it was that this was the form he took to face Tuma, I think. 

 

 

I think Greg put it as being like a 3 inch spiderman toy versus a 12 inch spiderman toy. They're exactly the same character, maybe even the same costume etc, so both are valid to an extent. Remember we've had Toa minifigs in the past, and with them the bigger version (with more detail) was the most canon version. So I thought that (both sets representing the same character Mata Nui, both representing a Toa/Glatorian sized character) maybe the bigger version with more detail might be more canon. I gotta agree I think the canister one is more canon, but are we definitely sure guys?


  • 0

#5 Offline Primis

Primis
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Members
  • Stone Champion Defeated

  • 08-June 03
  • 2,765 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 03:34 PM

You're overthinking it, neither one is any more canon than the other. Almost every character has had a plethora of wildly different depictions, and they are all equally canon.


  • 0

gallery_10204_135_28634.jpg


#6 Offline NuvaTube

NuvaTube
  • Members
  • Toa

  • 05-March 13
  • 132 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 04:01 PM

You're overthinking it, neither one is any more canon than the other. Almost every character has had a plethora of wildly different depictions, and they are all equally canon.

 

I don't think they are all equally canon. I'd bet you a few Widgets that the minifig Toa Inika from the Piraka Stronghold set are not as canonically accurate as the canister versions of them.


  • 0

#7 Offline Primis

Primis
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Members
  • Stone Champion Defeated

  • 08-June 03
  • 2,765 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 04:17 PM

 

You're overthinking it, neither one is any more canon than the other. Almost every character has had a plethora of wildly different depictions, and they are all equally canon.

 

I don't think they are all equally canon. I'd bet you a few Widgets that the minifig Toa Inika from the Piraka Stronghold set are not as canonically accurate as the canister versions of them.

 

 

...why not?

 

Here's a good example: the BIONICLE Stars version of Tahu is supposed to be the exact same form Tahu had as a Toa Mata. Needless to say they look nothing alike, but that doesn't make the Stars set non-canon. Same goes for Takanuva.


  • 0

gallery_10204_135_28634.jpg


#8 Offline Overscore

Overscore
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Outstanding BZP Citizens
  • Lightning Voyager

  • 14-March 13
  • 339 posts
  •   Outstanding BZPower Citizen

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 04:59 PM

 

 

You're overthinking it, neither one is any more canon than the other. Almost every character has had a plethora of wildly different depictions, and they are all equally canon.

 

I don't think they are all equally canon. I'd bet you a few Widgets that the minifig Toa Inika from the Piraka Stronghold set are not as canonically accurate as the canister versions of them.

 

 

...why not?

 

Here's a good example: the BIONICLE Stars version of Tahu is supposed to be the exact same form Tahu had as a Toa Mata. Needless to say they look nothing alike, but that doesn't make the Stars set non-canon. Same goes for Takanuva.

 

And Gresh.

 

I agree with NuvaTube about the spiderman buisness, about different depictions of Mata Nui. However, I think they're equally canon.


Edited by Oryx, Dec 29 2013 - 05:00 PM.

  • 0

˙˙˙609ƖƖϛƖㄣ6Ɩϛ69ㄣƖㄣ8ƐƖᄅϛ99ㄣ0ᄅ88ㄣϛ0Ɛϛ0ƐƐƖƖ009Ɛ06ϛᄅ68ㄥ9Ɛㄣ9ƐϛƖㄥƖ60ㄣϛᄅ6ᄅ8ᄅ960ᄅ60ᄅϛƖ88ㄣㄥƖ88ϛϛƖƐ909900ㄥ8ϛㄣᄅㄥ  
  ƐㄥᄅƖㄣƖ6ㄣᄅ09ᄅㄥ09Ɛ6ƐƐƖᄅ8ㄣ99ᄅƐㄣϛㄣ0Ɩ98ㄣƐ09ㄣƐᄅ699ϛ8ㄣ9ϛㄣƖ606Ɩ0ᄅƖㄥᄅϛ9ƖƐ8ㄥ98ㄥƐƐᄅ8ㄣ9ϛㄥㄣ8ᄅƖ9ㄣㄣƐƐ6ϛ99ϛㄥ60Ɩ88ᄅㄣㄣ  
  96Ɩ8Ɛ0Ɛ6ㄣϛ68ㄣ6ᄅᄅ9ㄣㄣ96ϛϛϛ0ƖƖᄅϛ8Ɛ6Ɩ0ㄥᄅ0Ɩㄣ8ᄅ0ϛㄣㄥƖƖƖ8ㄣ8ᄅƖ80ㄣ6ϛƐϛᄅㄥƖƐᄅᄅ8ϛ0ϛϛ609ㄣㄣ8Ɛ60ㄥㄣ990Ɛᄅ8ᄅƐƖϛ9808ㄣƖᄅ8  
  6ㄥ90ㄥƖƖᄅㄣƐϛᄅ8ㄣƐ08ᄅ986680ᄅ98ᄅ90ㄣ9Ɩ8ㄥ0Ɛᄅ6ϛㄣㄣ6ㄣㄥ60ᄅ8ϛ0ƖϛㄥƐ66Ɛ69Ɩㄥ6Ɩㄣ88ᄅ0ϛ6ㄥᄅƐ8ƐƐㄣ9ᄅ9ㄣ8ƐᄅƐ6ㄥ68ϛƐϛ9ᄅ6ϛƖㄣƖ˙


#9 Offline fishers64

fishers64
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Members
  • Rahkshi Unleashed

  • 05-July 10
  • 5,991 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 29 2013 - 05:54 PM

I think that the Toa Mata Nui set is non-canon because it never appeared in story or the Legend Reborn movie. 

 

Edit: The Greg Dialogues don't say one way or another, though. Neither does BS01.


Edited by fishers64, Dec 29 2013 - 06:03 PM.

  • 0

16028406952_a8c31f0bfe.jpg15838451978_fa70afcd66_m.jpg


#10 Offline NuvaTube

NuvaTube
  • Members
  • Toa

  • 05-March 13
  • 132 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 30 2013 - 04:51 AM

 

 

You're overthinking it, neither one is any more canon than the other. Almost every character has had a plethora of wildly different depictions, and they are all equally canon.

 

I don't think they are all equally canon. I'd bet you a few Widgets that the minifig Toa Inika from the Piraka Stronghold set are not as canonically accurate as the canister versions of them.

 

 

...why not?

 

Here's a good example: the BIONICLE Stars version of Tahu is supposed to be the exact same form Tahu had as a Toa Mata. Needless to say they look nothing alike, but that doesn't make the Stars set non-canon. Same goes for Takanuva.

 

 

Actually Tahu Stars in not the same as Tahu Mata. It's Tahu Mata but with Adaptive Armour, where the armour is just default (doesn't do anything and tries to look a bit like the armour of the wearer). Takanuva Stars, however, is the same as the original, but with silver instead of gold (because Gold armour was a big thing and giving one of the characters gold pieces anyway would visually undermine the main Golden Armour), with a reason of "silver is more visually discrete and he's trying not to be as obviously a Toa of Light" or something. I guess your point still stands though :L

 

However, Greg said years ago that all the Toa have hands, but some of the early sets didn't represent this at all (like Gali Mata). Therefore, the Stars Toa (at least in terms of hands) were more canon. So I think some sets are definitely more canon than others (even if they are so in certain aspects) :P


  • 0

#11 Offline Primis

Primis
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Members
  • Stone Champion Defeated

  • 08-June 03
  • 2,765 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 30 2013 - 11:19 AM

However, Greg said years ago that all the Toa have hands, but some of the early sets didn't represent this at all (like Gali Mata). Therefore, the Stars Toa (at least in terms of hands) were more canon. So I think some sets are definitely more canon than others (even if they are so in certain aspects) :P


When you get to the point where you start saying certain parts of a set are "more canon" than others, I think I can safely say that you're overthinking it. All that matters is the general appearance of the character, as long as that is correct then the set / drawing / CGI / whatever is "canon".


  • 0

gallery_10204_135_28634.jpg


#12 Offline bonesiii

bonesiii
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Forum Leaders
  • Perpetual Master of Reference

  • 14-March 03
  • 19,404 posts
  •   BZP Leader

Posted Dec 30 2013 - 03:39 PM

 

However, Greg said years ago that all the Toa have hands, but some of the early sets didn't represent this at all (like Gali Mata). Therefore, the Stars Toa (at least in terms of hands) were more canon. So I think some sets are definitely more canon than others (even if they are so in certain aspects) :P


When you get to the point where you start saying certain parts of a set are "more canon" than others, I think I can safely say that you're overthinking it. All that matters is the general appearance of the character, as long as that is correct then the set / drawing / CGI / whatever is "canon".

I think his point stands, and it's a simple point that quite frankly isn't anywhere near overthinking it. It's easy logic to realize that they're supposed to have hands, but some sets didn't show them, so that part of those sets is less canon. What exactly is the harm in realizing this?

 

To the topic question, basically what everybody else said. :P


  • 0

#13 Offline NuvaTube

NuvaTube
  • Members
  • Toa

  • 05-March 13
  • 132 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 30 2013 - 03:46 PM

 

 

However, Greg said years ago that all the Toa have hands, but some of the early sets didn't represent this at all (like Gali Mata). Therefore, the Stars Toa (at least in terms of hands) were more canon. So I think some sets are definitely more canon than others (even if they are so in certain aspects) :P


When you get to the point where you start saying certain parts of a set are "more canon" than others, I think I can safely say that you're overthinking it. All that matters is the general appearance of the character, as long as that is correct then the set / drawing / CGI / whatever is "canon".

I think his point stands, and it's a simple point that quite frankly isn't anywhere near overthinking it. It's easy logic to realize that they're supposed to have hands, but some sets didn't show them, so that part of those sets is less canon. What exactly is the harm in realizing this?

 

To the topic question, basically what everybody else said. :P

 

 

Took the words out my mouth Bones c:

 

As for the topic question, going by all sources (I think) showing the canister version of Mata Nui, I'm gonna assume the answer is indeed the most canon. 


  • 0

#14 Offline Primis

Primis
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Members
  • Stone Champion Defeated

  • 08-June 03
  • 2,765 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 30 2013 - 07:44 PM

 

 

However, Greg said years ago that all the Toa have hands, but some of the early sets didn't represent this at all (like Gali Mata). Therefore, the Stars Toa (at least in terms of hands) were more canon. So I think some sets are definitely more canon than others (even if they are so in certain aspects) :P


When you get to the point where you start saying certain parts of a set are "more canon" than others, I think I can safely say that you're overthinking it. All that matters is the general appearance of the character, as long as that is correct then the set / drawing / CGI / whatever is "canon".

I think his point stands, and it's a simple point that quite frankly isn't anywhere near overthinking it. It's easy logic to realize that they're supposed to have hands, but some sets didn't show them, so that part of those sets is less canon. What exactly is the harm in realizing this?

 

To the topic question, basically what everybody else said. :P

 

Bad example, I admit, but I think my point still stands.

 

Saying the sets are the definitive appearance of a character opens up a lot of problems. Of course the characters have hands, but they don't have giant, gaping holes in them, or random switches and buttons on them. The media portrayals only resemble the sets because they are there to sell the sets. If BIONICLE wasn't a merchandise-driven franchise, then there wouldn't be any inconsistency or ambiguity as to what a character looked like.

 

Journey of Takanuva is another good example. The cover shows him in his original form, but by this point he had been corrupted by Icarax. The book itself shows him in his Karda Nui-era form, which is also inaccurate because he only looked like that while in Karda Nui. There is no set of this middle form Takanuva had, and thus no media portrayal of it, but that doesn't mean that it didn't exist. Likewise, there's a flimsy justification for his armor being different colors in 2010, but not for his completely different body, because in-story he had the same body he always had before his run-in with a Shadow Leech.
 

Basically, what I'm saying is that the sets provide a good approximation of what the characters look like, but they are not the absolute, definitive appearance of them. Hence, two Mata Nui sets.


Edited by Primis, Dec 30 2013 - 07:47 PM.

  • 0

gallery_10204_135_28634.jpg


#15 Offline Ghabulous Ghoti

Ghabulous Ghoti
  • Members
  • Exo-Armored Toa

  • 20-October 07
  • 773 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 30 2013 - 11:22 PM

I sure hope Mata Nui didn't have such awful taste in colors. Perhaps he was color blind and didn't realize how hideous the titan version of his set looked?

 

For that reason, the canister one, but with a sword. I personally would take off the sword from the titan one and give it to the canister set for the "most" canon experience.


  • 0

GhotiH.png

 

Add me on Steam: Ghabulous Ghoti ------------------------------- Add me on Nintendo Network/Playstation Network: GhotiH ------------------------------- Add me on 3DS: 1461-6196-0520

Just be sure to tell me that you've added me!

 

Competitive Smash Bros. player! Message me to discuss strategies or mess around without strategy online!

Yes, you can still play Brawl online!


#16 Offline ~garnira returns~

~garnira returns~
  • Members
  • Encountering Protodermis

  • 02-June 08
  • 839 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 31 2013 - 01:54 AM

Well, if you want to get into how "cannon" a set's exact appearance is, just think of it this way; if characters looked and functioned exactly how the sets do, nobody would be able to un-clench their fists (save the older sets, which didn't have fingers to make fists with) or move their mouths... probably wouldn't even have room for internal organs! So, judging it by realism kind of throws the point, no sets are realistically possible :P

 

However, (back on track) comparing the two, I'd say that the canister-sized version is more accurate, seeing as it is the most often depicted of the two, and was the only body that the story actually mentioned mata nui forming. Unfortunately, the movie was the best story teller for 2009, since we didn't get a full linear group of scholastic novels from greg (besides raid on vulcanus which may not have been in the same time frame as the later parts of 2009). But ultimately, I get the feeling that lego just wanted to release a titan mata nui (that, or they had designed that as a side project or sketch and figured that the fans would enjoy it), and it holds no story ties. Just a big mata nui.


  • 0

leechfoam.gif "Copy and paste me into your sig! The shadows command you!"

My website: http://arra41.wix.com/zaro-nui ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

tarakavabanner.jpg

#tumaislove,tumaislife


#17 Offline NuvaTube

NuvaTube
  • Members
  • Toa

  • 05-March 13
  • 132 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 31 2013 - 12:17 PM

Well, if you want to get into how "cannon" a set's exact appearance is, just think of it this way; if characters looked and functioned exactly how the sets do, nobody would be able to un-clench their fists (save the older sets, which didn't have fingers to make fists with) or move their mouths... probably wouldn't even have room for internal organs! So, judging it by realism kind of throws the point, no sets are realistically possible :P

 

However, (back on track) comparing the two, I'd say that the canister-sized version is more accurate, seeing as it is the most often depicted of the two, and was the only body that the story actually mentioned mata nui forming. Unfortunately, the movie was the best story teller for 2009, since we didn't get a full linear group of scholastic novels from greg (besides raid on vulcanus which may not have been in the same time frame as the later parts of 2009). But ultimately, I get the feeling that lego just wanted to release a titan mata nui (that, or they had designed that as a side project or sketch and figured that the fans would enjoy it), and it holds no story ties. Just a big mata nui.

 

 

 

 

However, Greg said years ago that all the Toa have hands, but some of the early sets didn't represent this at all (like Gali Mata). Therefore, the Stars Toa (at least in terms of hands) were more canon. So I think some sets are definitely more canon than others (even if they are so in certain aspects) :P


When you get to the point where you start saying certain parts of a set are "more canon" than others, I think I can safely say that you're overthinking it. All that matters is the general appearance of the character, as long as that is correct then the set / drawing / CGI / whatever is "canon".

I think his point stands, and it's a simple point that quite frankly isn't anywhere near overthinking it. It's easy logic to realize that they're supposed to have hands, but some sets didn't show them, so that part of those sets is less canon. What exactly is the harm in realizing this?

 

To the topic question, basically what everybody else said. :P

 

Bad example, I admit, but I think my point still stands.

 

Saying the sets are the definitive appearance of a character opens up a lot of problems. Of course the characters have hands, but they don't have giant, gaping holes in them, or random switches and buttons on them. The media portrayals only resemble the sets because they are there to sell the sets. If BIONICLE wasn't a merchandise-driven franchise, then there wouldn't be any inconsistency or ambiguity as to what a character looked like.

 

Journey of Takanuva is another good example. The cover shows him in his original form, but by this point he had been corrupted by Icarax. The book itself shows him in his Karda Nui-era form, which is also inaccurate because he only looked like that while in Karda Nui. There is no set of this middle form Takanuva had, and thus no media portrayal of it, but that doesn't mean that it didn't exist. Likewise, there's a flimsy justification for his armor being different colors in 2010, but not for his completely different body, because in-story he had the same body he always had before his run-in with a Shadow Leech.
 

Basically, what I'm saying is that the sets provide a good approximation of what the characters look like, but they are not the absolute, definitive appearance of them. Hence, two Mata Nui sets.

 

 

Guys! I get that there is no definitive "this set is the absolutly what X character looks like", they are just there to approximate what they actually look like. Like the Click set versus movie Click. It's just an approximation. I'm just saying some approximations are more accurate than others, and asking which is ever so slightly better (:

 

Happy New Year btw :D


  • 0

#18 Offline Ghabulous Ghoti

Ghabulous Ghoti
  • Members
  • Exo-Armored Toa

  • 20-October 07
  • 773 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 31 2013 - 12:44 PM

Well, if you want to get into how "cannon" a set's exact appearance is, just think of it this way; if characters looked and functioned exactly how the sets do, nobody would be able to un-clench their fists (save the older sets, which didn't have fingers to make fists with) or move their mouths... probably wouldn't even have room for internal organs! So, judging it by realism kind of throws the point, no sets are realistically possible :P

Uh, about that... In my personal head-canon, the masks don't move at all. Piraka and other people with faces move just fine, but masks are just masks. They eyes behind the masks move, and sometimes you see a chin below the mask, but the masks are stationary, and I don't care what the canon has to say about that!


Edited by Ghabulous Ghoti, Dec 31 2013 - 12:44 PM.

  • 0

GhotiH.png

 

Add me on Steam: Ghabulous Ghoti ------------------------------- Add me on Nintendo Network/Playstation Network: GhotiH ------------------------------- Add me on 3DS: 1461-6196-0520

Just be sure to tell me that you've added me!

 

Competitive Smash Bros. player! Message me to discuss strategies or mess around without strategy online!

Yes, you can still play Brawl online!


#19 Offline The Legendary TNT

The Legendary TNT
  • Members
  • Conqueror of the Swarm!

  • 22-August 12
  • 714 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 31 2013 - 01:49 PM

Guys! I get that there is no definitive "this set is the absolutly what X character looks like", they are just there to approximate what they actually look like. Like the Click set versus movie Click. It's just an approximation. I'm just saying some approximations are more accurate than others, and asking which is ever so slightly better (:

Hmmm, so if there is no definitive representation of a character, then we don't know exaclty what any of the characters look like, do we? Just a pretty good idea.


Edited by TNT-Vezon with an Olmak, Dec 31 2013 - 01:50 PM.

  • 0

new_sig_legacy_2.png


#20 Offline bonesiii

bonesiii
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Forum Leaders
  • Perpetual Master of Reference

  • 14-March 03
  • 19,404 posts
  •   BZP Leader

Posted Dec 31 2013 - 02:13 PM

Guys! I get that there is no definitive "this set is the absolutly what X character looks like", they are just there to approximate what they actually look like. Like the Click set versus movie Click. It's just an approximation. I'm just saying some approximations are more accurate than others, and asking which is ever so slightly better (:

Hmmm, so if there is no definitive representation of a character, then we don't know exaclty what any of the characters look like, do we? Just a pretty good idea.

With fiction, what does "exactly what they look like" mean, anyways? There's no reality to be discovered, only basic ideas that are elaborated with specifics and when different people elaborate them they might vary on the details. Even if you try to define it as "whatever the head honchos prefer", even they might not have an ironclad, final-answer or even yet-established full idea of it. And when their organization has put out multiple interpretations, they might be reluctant to tell you that the details they prefer are "canon" per se in case it appeals to a too-small number of people compared to other interpretations.

 

I don't think it's that simple, but to some extent that's true. There's also story logic which could be used to come up with the most realistic interpretation based on clues given in canon. :shrugs: And these generalities often break down when you look at the details critically so that one looks more likely.

 

To use something else as an example, nobody would think that ugly potato interpretation of Spherus Magna could possibly be canon in any way. It's even hard to understand why any illustrator ever thought it was a good idea. So we all "know" that one can't be canon.

 

With Click, when you see the movie form with the body of a realistic beetle, compared to the rather clunky set form, I suspect we all instantly "know" the set form can't be canon. There's usually something or another that makes us think logically that one is a clear winner over another, or one part of one, etc. In this case it's the things everybody's brought up why the canister form has to be the "actual" one; it's shown in the movies, it's more practical, etc. etc.

 

But then there's some things that seem far more subjective, like:

 

Uh, about that... In my personal head-canon, the masks don't move at all.

Even there, maybe we tend to suspect what the "canon" is most times, and just "head-canon" differently due to a strong preference. :shrugs: (FTR, pretty sure the masks do emote in "canon"... although it is harder to square that with other facts like that it's just a mask hanging on the face with a magnet lol.)


  • 0

#21 Offline Ghabulous Ghoti

Ghabulous Ghoti
  • Members
  • Exo-Armored Toa

  • 20-October 07
  • 773 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 31 2013 - 05:22 PM

Ah, so what Bones the Third is saying is that there is no one solid canon. If you prefer the awful color scheme, and the jumbled together look of the titan version, go right ahead, that is what Mata Nui looked like.

 

From now on, in my own personal head-canon, Mata Nui is a four hundred foot tall purple platypus bear with pink horns and silver wings.


  • 0

GhotiH.png

 

Add me on Steam: Ghabulous Ghoti ------------------------------- Add me on Nintendo Network/Playstation Network: GhotiH ------------------------------- Add me on 3DS: 1461-6196-0520

Just be sure to tell me that you've added me!

 

Competitive Smash Bros. player! Message me to discuss strategies or mess around without strategy online!

Yes, you can still play Brawl online!


#22 Offline fishers64

fishers64
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Members
  • Rahkshi Unleashed

  • 05-July 10
  • 5,991 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 31 2013 - 07:09 PM

Ah, so what Bones the Third is saying is that there is no one solid canon. If you prefer the awful color scheme, and the jumbled together look of the titan version, go right ahead, that is what Mata Nui looked like.

 

From now on, in my own personal head-canon, Mata Nui is a four hundred foot tall purple platypus bear with pink horns and silver wings.

Nah, it's more like a seven-foot tall white humanoid with black at the joints, a golden face, and red tentacles coming from the back. 

 

After all, this is totally canon since Mata Nui can convince the Ignika to make whatever body he wants. :P

 

 

To use something else as an example, nobody would think that ugly potato interpretation of Spherus Magna could possibly be canon in any way. It's even hard to understand why any illustrator ever thought it was a good idea. So we all "know" that one can't be canon.

 

With Click, when you see the movie form with the body of a realistic beetle, compared to the rather clunky set form, I suspect we all instantly "know" the set form can't be canon. There's usually something or another that makes us think logically that one is a clear winner over another, or one part of one, etc. In this case it's the things everybody's brought up why the canister form has to be the "actual" one; it's shown in the movies, it's more practical, etc. etc.

Ah, so what Bones the Third is saying is that there is no one solid canon. If you prefer the awful color scheme, and the jumbled together look of the titan version, go right ahead, that is what Mata Nui looked like.

Who is Bones the Third? I didn't see any "Bones the Third" here who said that. :lookaround:


  • 0

16028406952_a8c31f0bfe.jpg15838451978_fa70afcd66_m.jpg


#23 Offline Ghabulous Ghoti

Ghabulous Ghoti
  • Members
  • Exo-Armored Toa

  • 20-October 07
  • 773 posts
  •  

Posted Dec 31 2013 - 08:54 PM

 

Ah, so what Bones the Third is saying is that there is no one solid canon. If you prefer the awful color scheme, and the jumbled together look of the titan version, go right ahead, that is what Mata Nui looked like.

Who is Bones the Third? I didn't see any "Bones the Third" here who said that. :lookaround:

 

I'm kinda poking some fun at bonesiii's name. I've no clue how he intends it to be pronounced, so I'm just going to call him Bones the Third because bonesiii = Bones III in my mind :P


  • 0

GhotiH.png

 

Add me on Steam: Ghabulous Ghoti ------------------------------- Add me on Nintendo Network/Playstation Network: GhotiH ------------------------------- Add me on 3DS: 1461-6196-0520

Just be sure to tell me that you've added me!

 

Competitive Smash Bros. player! Message me to discuss strategies or mess around without strategy online!

Yes, you can still play Brawl online!


#24 Offline ZippyWharrgarbl

ZippyWharrgarbl
  • Members
  • Descending into Protodermis

  • 19-August 07
  • 967 posts
  •  

Posted Jan 09 2014 - 04:51 AM

EDIT: Ugh sorry I misread the question >:C I wrote an entire ruddy essay about whether Mata Nui is called 'Mata Nui' or 'Toa Mata Nui' on Bara Magna and I feel like such a silly.

 

I'd call the Mata Nui set more canon, purely because it is the form used to represent him in the movie, comics and illustrated books, whereas the Toa Mata Nui set hasn't appeared anywhere in the story. Besides, in canon, Mata Nui wouldn't look all that much like the toys, instead being made of flesh and metal and other stuff. I guess, even then, using the representation in the media of the Bionicle story, I'd place him as looking more like the Mata Nui set.

 

Interesting to note, though, on the topic of canon appearances: the official The Legend Reborn novel has his armour colour down as being 'white and gold', not 'black and gold'. Weird.


Edited by ZippyWharrgarbl, Jan 09 2014 - 05:10 AM.

  • 0

Memoirs of the Dead entry: The Unknown Turaga, a tale from the late Chronicler Kodan's journal.


#25 Offline Illuminatus

Illuminatus
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Outstanding BZP Citizens
  • Mask of Light Unveiled

  • 07-January 05
  • 5,191 posts
  •   Outstanding BZPower Citizen

Posted Jan 09 2014 - 07:58 PM

I'm rather curious, was there any official explanation as to Takanuva's silver armor in 2010 after it was clearly restored to gold at the end of 2008?


  • 0

illuminati_bionicle_180.png


#26 Offline Pupwa21

Pupwa21
  • Banned Members
  • Toa

  • 17-April 10
  • 112 posts
  •  

Posted Jan 09 2014 - 08:42 PM

My therory was that he did that to disguise himself from Terdax.
  • 0
Looks like it's the end of the line for 21.

#27 Offline nocturn701

nocturn701
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Members
  • Tohunga

  • 02-January 14
  • 37 posts

Posted Jan 10 2014 - 07:04 AM

​I find the titan version really over emphasizes that he's supposed to be huge, and I don't know why but I'm not a big fan of the Glatorian one..... so I'd have to say the Phantoka one that rode a hover board.


  • 0

#28 Offline bonesiii

bonesiii
  • Premier Member
  • Premier Forum Leaders
  • Perpetual Master of Reference

  • 14-March 03
  • 19,404 posts
  •   BZP Leader

Posted Jan 10 2014 - 10:04 AM

​I find the titan version really over emphasizes that he's supposed to be huge, and I don't know why but I'm not a big fan of the Glatorian one..... so I'd have to say the Phantoka one that rode a hover board.

Do you mean Toa Ignika? That was just the mind of the mask making itself a body. Mata Nui's mind wasn't yet in the mask at that time (not until the end of that year).


  • 0

#29 Online Chro

Chro
  • Members
  • Defender of Mata Nui

  • 07-August 12
  • 2,127 posts
  •  

Posted Jan 10 2014 - 12:14 PM

​I find the titan version really over emphasizes that he's supposed to be huge, and I don't know why but I'm not a big fan of the Glatorian one..... so I'd have to say the Phantoka one that rode a hover board.

That isn't Mata Nui. :P


  • 0

"I guess you can't kill what's already dead."





0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users