The Gang of Five
The Land Before Time => General Land Before Time => Character Discussion => Topic started by: Cancerian Tiger on February 03, 2016, 02:35:59 AM
-
Hi, I see Wild Arms doesn't have his own topic thread yet, so here it is!
I have already seen some mixed reviews about Wild Arms, but I actually like him. He's far less annoying than the Yellowbellies, but it seems like much of his appearance is similar to them. I totally get he's meant to provide comic relief, and I feel like his antics are a bit exaggerated at times, but I got a few laughs out of him ;).
What are your thoughts on Wild Arms?
-
I liked him. He made me laugh out loud so many times! Although, his personality/antics were a little over the top. He kind of reminds me of a cross between Guido and the Yellowbellies. XD
-
Yeah, I like him too. And he does also remind me of Guido😁.
-
I gotta admit, I was extremely worried when I first saw him in the teaser, but looks like I was wrong. He wasn't nearly the story-killing annoyance I pegged him to be. In fact, he reminded me a lot of Shaggy from Scooby Doo.
-
So after rewatching the film quite a few times, I'm really surprised how much I've grown to like Wild Arms! I honestly thought I was going to hate him and that he was too forced and 'modern' to work in a Land Before Time film, but now he's one of the main highlights of the film for me. He's funny and even kinda cute at times. Glad he's part of the Land Before Time pantheon now!
-
ALL MY YES. Wild Arms is the type of Dinosaur that the Yellow Bellies should've been to begin with; same overall build, but unlike the latter group, Wild Arms actually LOOKS like a Dinosaur!
-
He was a bit over the top, but was a fun character. they didn't have him in to many scenes, in my opinion, but the right amount.
-
I was concerned when I first saw him in the ten minute preview, but after seeing him in the film I was relieved. He was an alright character, overall. If the yellowbellies had been more like him then the 13th film would not have had the reputation it has developed.
-
I was hoping at least someone would've told me what he was. :p I couldn't figure it out.
-
I can see the comparison between Guido and Wild Arms. They both seem to share a similar nervousness, though Wild Arms' seems to be more focused on the perils he's in or about to get into.
Wild Arms doesn't seem as eager to offer help if said peril is involved. I can't help but suspect Grandpa Longneck and Mr. Threehorn persuaded Wild Arms to help in the rescue mission with the reasoning that he owed Bron for having looked after him and he had a obligation to repay that debt. That must have pinged his conscience, since he agreed, albeit very reluctantly, to help.
Can't help but suspect Wild Arms will continue to feel he owes Bron for his kindness to the point that he will feel independently moved to save someone Bron cares about. He'd be the type who'd be dragged kicking and moaning into adventures while, in spite of himself, coming to like these adventuring people.
-
Well, he's as annoying as the Yellowbellies and even looking a little similar to them (imo). No wait, he's even worse than them :bang
Note: I have no problems watching LBT 13. The Yellowbellies were kinda... annoying but the movie is still somewhat enjoyable. Wild Arms is only annoying, there's nothing likeable about him at all. He wasn't funny, he seemed like a bad cross between Guido and the Yellowbellies, and he's barely contributing anything to the plot. A random member of Bron's herd (or Shorty, heck where's that guy anyway?!) would've done the trick too! :rolleyes
-
I can see why Wild Arms can be taxing. The yellow bellies usually mean well, even if they aren't very successful at it, and that can be excused by their struggle with long term thinking and limited ability to truly mentally grasp certain situations.
Wild Arms, even with his heightened fears and missing certain details (like where he got his nickname from), appears to have a stronger grasp of what's going on around him. While not malicious, he's more willing to put himself before others. Despite sharing a similar kind of nervousness, he seems to have far less of Guido's kindness and selflessness. A bumbler whose more self-centered can be more tiring to watch than a bumbler who has more explicit redeeming qualities.
-
I found Wild Arms to be a nice combo of whimsy and silly. He is by far superior to the Yellowbellies and Wisdom of Friends wierdosaurs.
-
Am I the only one who legit thinks Wild Arms's role would've been a whole lot more interesting if he was a villain? I get that he was supposed to be written as more of cowardly comic relief, but there was something about his tone and attitude that struck me as a bit antagonistic.
It's not that I don't hate him as a character, only that I felt like his type of character was used incorrectly, so to speak.
-
Am I the only one who legit thinks Wild Arms's role would've been a whole lot more interesting if he was a villain? I get that he was supposed to be written as more of cowardly comic relief, but there was something about his tone and attitude that struck me as a bit antagonistic.
It's not that I don't hate him as a character, only that I felt like his type of character was used incorrectly, so to speak.
If anything, him being an antagonist would elevate the movie by virtue of not having a cookie-cutter post-VII sharptooth villain. :p
-
Am I the only one who legit thinks Wild Arms's role would've been a whole lot more interesting if he was a villain? I get that he was supposed to be written as more of cowardly comic relief, but there was something about his tone and attitude that struck me as a bit antagonistic.
It's not that I don't hate him as a character, only that I felt like his type of character was used incorrectly, so to speak.
If anything, him being an antagonist would elevate the movie by virtue of not having a cookie-cutter post-VII sharptooth villain. :p
Yes, that too.
-
Am I the only one who legit thinks Wild Arms's role would've been a whole lot more interesting if he was a villain? I get that he was supposed to be written as more of cowardly comic relief, but there was something about his tone and attitude that struck me as a bit antagonistic.
It's not that I don't hate him as a character, only that I felt like his type of character was used incorrectly, so to speak.
If he was a villian, I would have gone with the selfish villian; cares only about himself and left Bron to his fate. I have a hard time picturing Wild Arms as a conqueror or sharptoothesque terrorizer. Then again, his cowardice could be a cover for his more invidious self! Muwhahahaha! :p
-
I was hoping at least someone would've told me what he was. :p I couldn't figure it out.
He's a Nothronychus, according to a post from the official LBT FB page. (So glad they made him look more like a proper therizinosaur than the yellowbellies!)
I gotta admit, I actually like Wild Arms. I can see where his hyperactive/cowardly antics would be annoying to some people, but for the most part, I thought he was quite funny! The scenes where he plays off Mr. Threehorn are gold! :lol And when he and Chomper meet...THAT got actual laughter out of me! (Few LBT movies have ever made that happen.) I think part of the humor of him is that he's not the type of character you'd typically find in the LBT universe. They have him use more modern language like "up top," but they don't overdo that kind of thing to the point where it goes from funny to annoying. Actually, Wild Arms seems like what you would get if you dropped some normal, modern-day dude into the dinosaur world--while other characters are like, "Oh, it's a sharptooth, it must be Tuesday," he's flying into a panic. Let's face it: if any of us got dropped in the LBT world, we would react in the same way as Wild Arms. :p
Can't help but suspect Wild Arms will continue to feel he owes Bron for his kindness to the point that he will feel independently moved to save someone Bron cares about. He'd be the type who'd be dragged kicking and moaning into adventures while, in spite of himself, coming to like these adventuring people.
Ever since XIV, I've had a headcanon quite similar to this. I really don't think we can say Wild Arms is completely selfish. He may not have wanted to lead Grandpa Longneck and Mr. Threehorn to the Fire Mountain, and he may have tried to convince them to go back early on, but as soon as Grandpa Longneck mentions the children to him, Wild Arms is defeated--he knows he can't argue with that, not wanting the kids to be in danger. Maybe he also felt guilty over it being his fault Littlefoot knew how to get to the Fire Mountain in the first place. So even as important as saving his own skin is to Wild Arms, I can't help thinking his good side ultimately overcomes that.
I do wish, however, that he'd gotten his proper chance to be an unexpected hero before the movie's end, helping to fend of a sharptooth or save Bron. Felt like he should have gotten that sort of character arc. Also, it would have been nice to see more of him and Etta interacting, seeing as how they seemed to be good friends from the brief moment of screen time they had together, plus Etta's reaction to Littlefoot mentioning him.
(Oh, and I've noticed, by the way, that there must be some person on the internet who downright hates this character. The wiki descriptions of Wild Arms I've seen paint him in a very negative light, all but calling him an antagonist!)
-
Am I the only one who legit thinks Wild Arms's role would've been a whole lot more interesting if he was a villain? I get that he was supposed to be written as more of cowardly comic relief, but there was something about his tone and attitude that struck me as a bit antagonistic.
It's not that I don't hate him as a character, only that I felt like his type of character was used incorrectly, so to speak.
If he was a villian, I would have gone with the selfish villian; cares only about himself and left Bron to his fate. I have a hard time picturing Wild Arms as a conqueror or sharptoothesque terrorizer. Then again, his cowardice could be a cover for his more invidious self! Muwhahahaha! :p
My thoughts exactly. He strikes me as the kind of selfish coward who'd abandon the gang without a second thought.
-
Is Wild Arms a relative of the Rainbowfaces? At least a similiar species?
-
Is Wild Arms a relative of the Rainbowfaces? At least a similiar species?
Well, we know that Wild Arms is a Nothrynchus, a kind of therizinasaur. The Rainbowfaces pretty heavily resemble Ozzy and Strut, with some notable differences, so they're probably some kind of ornithimid. Therefore, both of them are maniraptors, so they're somewhat related, but funny enough, the Yellow Bellies are probably more related to Wild Arms than the Rainbowfaces, seeing as they also appear to be a therizinasaur of some description.
-
Is Wild Arms a relative of the Rainbowfaces? At least a similiar species?
Well, we know that Wild Arms is a Nothrynchus, a kind of therizinasaur. The Rainbowfaces pretty heavily resemble Ozzy and Strut, with some notable differences, so they're probably some kind of ornithimid. Therefore, both of them are maniraptors, so they're somewhat related, but funny enough, the Yellow Bellies are probably more related to Wild Arms than the Rainbowfaces, seeing as they also appear to be a therizinasaur of some description.
That would've been my answer. Official sources have confirmed that Wild Arms is a therizinosaur, while it's pretty safe to say that the Rainbow Faces aren't--I always thought they were Gallimimus.
-
Uh, regarding Wild Arms...have you guys seen his page on the LBT Wiki (https://landbeforetime.fandom.com/wiki/Wild_Arms)? I feel like the guy who created it really just used it as an excuse to bash the character for whatever reason, because it's the most biased wiki description I've ever seen. If I hadn't seen the movie, I'd probably think Wild Arms was some sort of villain! And every single wiki page involving him (including Wikipedia) just has that same completely subjective description copy-pasted onto it. I came across this before when I was searching the LBT Wiki Gallery for images to use as drawing reference, and it's bugged me ever since. I mean, isn't the whole point of any wiki to be an objective source of information? What's it take to get an account and edit a page? I'm ready to do something about this... :rolleyes
-
Uh, regarding Wild Arms...have you guys seen his page on the LBT Wiki (https://landbeforetime.fandom.com/wiki/Wild_Arms)? I feel like the guy who created it really just used it as an excuse to bash the character for whatever reason, because it's the most biased wiki description I've ever seen. If I hadn't seen the movie, I'd probably think Wild Arms was some sort of villain! And every single wiki page involving him (including Wikipedia) just has that same completely subjective description copy-pasted onto it. I came across this before when I was searching the LBT Wiki Gallery for images to use as drawing reference, and it's bugged me ever since. I mean, isn't the whole point of any wiki to be an objective source of information? What's it take to get an account and edit a page? I'm ready to do something about this... :rolleyes
Usually you're allowed to edit Wikias without creating an account, but if having an account is a prerequisite to make edits, then you can create one without any charge whatsoever. I don't see what's holding you back.
-
Honestly, I just thought Wild Arms was just a copy of Guido, although a bit of an improvement in character and personality as Wild Arms was actually somewhat entertaining. Though tbh they both look the same and appear to be or similar species.
-
Honestly, I just thought Wild Arms was just a copy of Guido, although a bit of an improvement in character and personality as Wild Arms was actually somewhat entertaining. Though tbh they both look the same and appear to be or similar species.
Interesting observation. I just remembered the physical similarities too.
-
I liked this character a lot. I haven’t watched JOTB since just after it was released, but I remember enjoying him quite a bit. I really like his design. Hopefully he’ll make a reappearance if the series is ever continued.
-
To be honest, I don’t see why a lot of people in the fandom hate him, to be honest, even though he doesn’t have a lot of screen time, he still is a very funny character.
Like, he’s the most I laughed at since Guido was on-screen. My favorite part of Wild Arms was him fainting from Chomper because he was a sharptooth, and he’s not used to friendly sharptooths, so he thought he wasn’t nice.
My other favorite part was when Wild Arms offered a high five from Topps, but he ended up never receiving it because of how annoyed Topps is of him (I would’ve given him a high five).
But yeah, that’s just my opinion, if you don’t like him, that’s fine with me.
-
I realize that a few people don't like this character, probably becuase he can come off as annoying sometimes.
He's an alright guy in my opinon, though he can be too much somtimes. Wild arms is just this easily scared and talkative bird brain that everyone hates in the movie. Not sure why universal put him in there, when they could have just shorty explain what happened to Bron.
But oh well. He's part of the franchise now and there's nothing we can do, you either hate him or you don't. Wild arms is alright, I just wished he wasn't so dramatic sometimes. Like, come on! How is this man still alive when he just faints or stays frozen when he comes across danger?
-
Am I the only one who legit thinks Wild Arms's role would've been a whole lot more interesting if he was a villain? I get that he was supposed to be written as more of cowardly comic relief, but there was something about his tone and attitude that struck me as a bit antagonistic.
It's not that I don't hate him as a character, only that I felt like his type of character was used incorrectly, so to speak.
If anything, him being an antagonist would elevate the movie by virtue of not having a cookie-cutter post-VII sharptooth villain. :p
I agree.
#endsharptoothracism