State of the Ninja Turtle Franchise: Your Ramblings..

[Shredder565]

For those who don't read Murphy's Blog, Shame on you :)...

http://the-5th-turtle.blogspot.com/2008/08/are-you-experientialed.html

There are alot of ticked off fans there venting out at how the powers that be are handling, or in this case, NOT handling t hings for the franchise itself, let alone the 25th anniversary. So many COOL things that could be done, and most will probably never be held back due to corporate speak and 'budget reasons'.

So, what would you like to see improve on the turtles franchise? Keep it polite, but firm. No Yes Men in this post :)..

Neil

[Movie06]

Just two: I hope there's a sequel to the new film and I'd like to see more of the TMNT comics.

Oh, and one more thing, I'm very much looking forward to the new TMNT episodes.

[veemonjosh]

Just two: I hope there's a sequel to the new film and I'd like to see more of the TMNT comics.

Yes, a new film and wider availability of the comics are the two main things I want as well (I can only find the comics at a really remote comic book shop across the river, and even then, it's issues from 2002!).

I also want 4Kids to try to get a cable channel to air reruns of 2K3 like CN used to do (except hopefully not in a 6:30AM time slot this time). It would definitely put the series in the main public eye, which despite 2K3 being nearly 150 episodes long, practically ignores it.

I'd suggest Jetix, but this whole Disney XD thing is confusing. Maybe Nicktoons, but they seem to be focusing more on exclusive programming...

[Shredder565]

vee, good point. That's another thing I totally forgot about.

It's amazing a company like 4kids can start off so great and then go down hill so quickly.. Not Quite the 88mph of the animation industry...but slowly getting there :).

[veemonjosh]

vee, good point. That's another thing I totally forgot about.

It's amazing a company like 4kids can start off so great and then go down hill so quickly.. Not Quite the 88mph of the animation industry...but slowly getting there :).

Eh, I also put the blame on CN for killing it at 6:30AM, which they usually just reserve for cancelled/ended shows (which TMNT 2K3 is neither yet).

[creativerealms]

Actually if 4kids could get TMNT 2k3 reruns to launch with Disney Xd it would be great. I mean the channel is not giving up on animation just trying to taget boys in a way regular Disney Channel has failed. TMNT 2k3 would be perfect for that target group. That being said I don't see it airing their ever sadly.

[veemonjosh]

Actually if 4kids could get TMNT 2k3 reruns to launch with Disney Xd it would be great. I mean the channel is not giving up on animation just trying to taget boys in a way regular Disney Channel has failed. TMNT 2k3 would be perfect for that target group. That being said I don't see it airing their ever sadly.

Well, Chaotic seems to be doing well on Jetix, so Disney might become interested in getting other 4Kids action titles.

[Old Guy]

I wish I could comment, but I have no idea what's going on with the franchise. I saw a little bit of the 2003 series and the 2007 movie, but aside from that I'm in the dark. Perhaps that's the problem. The franchise should be more visible. I mean, how many people actually watch 4Kids? That line-up is like a poor man's Nick, Disney, and CN. Also, when are we gonna get a new live-action movie? The CGI movie was great and all, but a new live-action flick to go along with the current comic book adaptations would be great.

[D Dubbs]

I mean, how many people actually watch 4Kids? That line-up is like a poor man's Nick, Disney, and CN.

For Saturday morning ratings, both 4Kids blocks usually do as good or better than Cartoon Network and Disney. They're usually behind Nick, though there have been a few instances where they've come close to beating or have beaten some Nick shows.

As for the TMNT franchise, I think it's doing solid. It's not a mega hit or anything, but I've seen plenty of TMNT merchandise like valentines and fruit snacks come through the checkout line at the grocery store I work at. Kids are still enjoying the franchise, that's for sure.

[Old Guy]

For Saturday morning ratings, both 4Kids blocks usually do as good or better than Cartoon Network and Disney. They're usually behind Nick, though there have been a few instances where they've come close to beating or have beaten some Nick shows.

Obviously. They have no competition. The cable channels provide VERY few new episodes on Saturday morning. If they did, 4Kids wouldn't survive.

[D Dubbs]

Obviously. They have no competition. The cable channels provide VERY few new episodes on Saturday morning. If they did, 4Kids wouldn't survive.

Well, yes and no. Disney doesn't really count, since they air preschool material on Saturday morning. Nick primarily airs Spongebob reruns, however, they've had some premieres during Saturday mornings, like Mighty B, Back at the Barnyard and Tak and the Power of Juju. On Cartoon Network, you have DAS, which is pretty much the main action block on the network. For a good several months this year, they've had the entire block premiering new episodes.

So, 4Kids does have some competition, and they do fairly decent against it. However, I do agree with what people have said earlier in the thread: the show would definitely benefit from airing on a mainstream cable network. TMNT (2003) has indeed done relatively well airing once a week (after all, 143 episodes is quite an accomplishment), but if you want it to be a smash hit, it has to be on more often.

Honestly, though, I don't really care if the turtles becomes a huge hit again. In fact, I rather like the Turtles in their humble position in current pop culture.

[Antiyonder]

1. Classic Comic stories reprints should be made a priority. DC/Marvel/Archie have a good number of their early stories available. I mean, they only starting a reprint next year?

2. Air the classic series somewhere on a regular basis. And yes I know they're on DVD, but so are plenty of other shows that still air frequently. And frankly, being a household name should qualify as a reason for a show to be airing.

[Toon Out]

I wish I could comment, but I have no idea what's going on with the franchise. I saw a little bit of the 2003 series and the 2007 movie, but aside from that I'm in the dark. Perhaps that's the problem. The franchise should be more visible. I mean, how many people actually watch 4Kids? That line-up is like a poor man's Nick, Disney, and CN. Also, when are we gonna get a new live-action movie? The CGI movie was great and all, but a new live-action flick to go along with the current comic book adaptations would be great.


There has been talk of a possible live-action TMNT movie, with CGI turtles, but any concrete info won't be available till the end of September.

[Old Guy]

There has been talk of a possible live-action TMNT movie, with CGI turtles, but any concrete info won't be available till the end of September.

Oh, the horror! The Jim Henson suits were perfect. Perfect!

[Andrew T. Hingson]

I think the turtles are doing alright. I would have prefered not to have waited for the 2K8 episodes so long but eh... we're almost there.

An sequel to the 2007 movie should be a priority as should bringing TMNT back to comic books on a grander scale. Be it reprints a new serial or what have you.

I also agree that the 2003 series should move to Disney XD where it could potentially get several full runs. It's just what they would be looking for if they wanted to get some more boy friendly acquisitions. So it should be a no brainer.

[Cactusjack1999]

Frankly I would like to have them release all the classic series as 1 single boxed set instead of 6 or 7 DVD's which I've all but given up trying to find (I never buy the 4th disc of a set first. I collect them in order)

[veemonjosh]

Frankly I would like to have them release all the classic series as 1 single boxed set instead of 6 or 7 DVD's which I've all but given up trying to find (I never buy the 4th disc of a set first. I collect them in order)

Actually, it's been more like 6 volumes (covering seasons 1-3) and three season sets (seasons 4-6 with the rest coming next year)...

[Super_Staff]

Also, when are we gonna get a new live-action movie? The CGI movie was great and all, but a new live-action flick to go along with the current comic book adaptations would be great.

Probably never.

I heard Kevin Munroe (movie's director) and Peter Laird (one of the TMNT creators) tried to pitch a live action movie sequel to several studios, but got turned down until one (WB) felt it'd be best as a CGI. And then that's what we got.

I, for one, liked the new movie. The CGI worked for it. :anime:

[CyberCubed]

If you follow official TMNT blogs like Murphy's blog posted above, you know Mirage has been negotiating with several companies for a second movie.

My big hope is for a new trilogy just like the original trilogy, but I think we're only going to get 2 movies this time. Oh well.

[DarkKnight]

If you follow official TMNT blogs like Murphy's blog posted above, you know Mirage has been negotiating with several companies for a second movie.

My big hope is for a new trilogy just like the original trilogy, but I think we're only going to get 2 movies this time. Oh well.

That's fine with me because the 3rd movie was complete garbage.

Anyways I'm not really angry about any of this stuff they're doing for the 25th anniversary like pretty much everybody on Murph's blog is. I think it's really kinda cool that they're doing SOMETHING even if it doesn't really appeal to "hardcore fans"...whatever those are; come on a life-sized turtle van touring the country? that's kick-ass.

And actually I feel kinda spoiled by all the great turtle stuff we've already gotten. We've had 2 awesome cartoon series already and the last one is still continuing soon with a new art direction. We got 4 turtle movies, 3 of which were stellar with another one likely coming and Vol. 4 of the comics and Tales of are still going. We're getting the Forever War comics next year. So I think we're in great shape with the way the franchise is going and I don't really get why anyone is upset. After the first toon ended I thought for sure that would be the end of turtles on TV and the big screen but was wrong on both counts. We've got a lot to look forward to.

[Movie06]

There has been talk of a possible live-action TMNT movie, with CGI turtles, but any concrete info won't be available till the end of September.

I read about that, John Woo was supposed to direct but that didn't work out.

[Old Guy]

I read about that, John Woo was supposed to direct but that didn't work out.

Yea, but that was YEARS ago. Way before the 2007 movie was even greenlit.

[Toon Out]

My big hope is for a new trilogy just like the original trilogy, but I think we're only going to get 2 movies this time. Oh well.

The number sequels are always determined by how well the last movie did, if TMNT 2 is profitable at the boxoffice/DVD, then a third movie will be possible.




I, for one, liked the new movie. The CGI worked for it. :anime:

It doesn't appear that Mirage will be working with Imagi on the sequel, but this does not totally rule out the possibility that a sequel won't be CGI, here is a piece of art that Imagi sent Mirage, a possible unused pitch for the sequel, originally taken from Steve Murphy's Blog:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_gb-JVVPbQkU/SJtGFizk5MI/AAAAAAAAC-Q/JMvg9eOonrs/s1600-h/TMNT2.jpg

[Movie06]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_gb-JVVPbQkU/SJtGFizk5MI/AAAAAAAAC-Q/JMvg9eOonrs/s1600-h/TMNT2.jpg

Was that The Shredder and how did Leonardo, Raphael, Donatello and Splinter got turned into regular animals?

[Blackstar]

Also, when are we gonna get a new live-action movie? The CGI movie was great and all, but a new live-action flick to go along with the current comic book adaptations would be great.

Honestly, I wouldn't care if there's never another live action Turtles film as long as we get a decent sequel for TMNT. I actually thought that the CGI was a vast improvement over the live action films. The 1st one was OK, but movies 2 and 3 were gawdawful.

[Cactusjack1999]

Actually, it's been more like 6 volumes (covering seasons 1-3) and three season sets (seasons 4-6 with the rest coming next year)...


Exactly my point. 6 seperate DVD purchases to do the first 3 seasons.

Not my ideal of "collecting"

I say put them all in 1 box. Collectors edition Tin or something, perhaps a figurine or other tchotchke.

Put that out for about $100 and then perhaps we'll talk.

I hate sounding negative about these things. I really do... I just don't like it when we, as fans, get jerked arround cause someone's DVD release time table is an after thought.

[Old Guy]

Honestly, I wouldn't care if there's never another live action Turtles film as long as we get a decent sequel for TMNT. I actually thought that the CGI was a vast improvement over the live action films. The 1st one was OK, but movies 2 and 3 were gawdawful.

That's crazy talk. The first live-action movie was like the ultimate Turtles movie. They did a fine job of combining the comics and cartoons. It had something for everyone.

[Silverstar]

Honestly, I wouldn't care if there's never another live action Turtles film as long as we get a decent sequel for TMNT. I actually thought that the CGI was a vast improvement over the live action films. The 1st one was OK, but movies 2 and 3 were gawdawful.



That's crazy talk. The first live-action movie was like the ultimate Turtles movie. They did a fine job of combining the comics and cartoons. It had something for everyone.

Um, Black said the first live-action movie was OK too. Why are you debating when the 2 of you basically agree?

[Master Moron]

Honestly, I wouldn't care if there's never another live action Turtles film as long as we get a decent sequel for TMNT. I actually thought that the CGI was a vast improvement over the live action films. The 1st one was OK, but movies 2 and 3 were gawdawful.

I thought TMNT was pretty bad. I mean, the fighting scenes were pretty fun, but the plot was absolutely horrible. Why the hell am I supposed to give a damn about this Max Winters guy? There's so many villains from the comics and cartoons so why the hell waste a movie on that loser? It was nice to see Karai in it, but she barely did anything. I've seen reviews from people who haven't seen the new cartoon series and they didn't understand who she was or why she was leading the foot clan.

Actually, I've seen the new cartoon and even I was a little confused. In the first scene in which she fought the turtles it was completely unclear whether she was meeting the turtles for the first time or whether they've met before. I don't know why they didn't give Karai a better introduction like they did in the new cartoon. I mean, it was almost if they expected the audience to already be familiar with her character. It's kind of like at the beginning of Batman Forever how Two-Face was already an established villain and they barely explained his backstory at all.

Also, the character designs were way too cute for me.

[NightwingAngelo]

I think the sad thing about the TMNT franchise is how little outside support it's gotten... and I mean from the companies that are supposed to surround it.

Put plainly -

- The Games SUCK. Are you trying to tell me that the same people who made the Ninja Turtles games are behind the Metal Gear Solid series or behind the Dance Dance Revolution series? LOL! I'd think you were on something if I didn't find it out for myself. There's little effort put into it, or at least no real imagination. If the game is great no doubt more people would watch the TV series... which many of them still don't even know exists even after reaching 100+ episodes! How is this possible?

- The toys have little to NOTHING to do with the series (Why doesn't the Shellcopter look like the shellcopter from the TV show, or why didn't the Battleshell look like the Battleshell from the TV show, or why doesn't Raphie's freakin' bike look like his own freakin' bike from the TV show?). It's ridiculous. The toys are horrible and just variations of the same thing done over and over again to death. (Example: Ninja Turtles, followed by Ninja Turtles using bigger versions of th same weapon).

- The Broadcaster(S): The show needs to move, period. The commercials for TMNT2K3 were absolutely horrible until Season 4 (I'm wondering if they started hearing complaints by then). The show was cheesified and lame-o-fied to death. And this is/was actually a pretty good show.


So in short, the show was fighting for it's life from day one. Unfortunately, it was against it's own resources.

[veemonjosh]

- The toys have little to NOTHING to do with the series (Why doesn't the Shellcopter look like the shellcopter from the TV show, or why didn't the Battleshell look like the Battleshell from the TV show, or why doesn't Raphie's freakin' bike look like his own freakin' bike from the TV show?). It's ridiculous. The toys are horrible and just variations of the same thing done over and over again to death. (Example: Ninja Turtles, followed by Ninja Turtles using bigger versions of th same weapon).

^ This is the way Playmates has been making the toys since 1988. They've almost NEVER matched the cartoon designs and have tons of variations of the same designs.

So it's not like they're doing anything differently than they did with the original toys. Except, maybe in terms of creativity...

[NightwingAngelo]

^ This is the way Playmates has been making the toys since 1988. They've almost NEVER matched the cartoon designs and have tons of variations of the same designs.

So it's not like they're doing anything differently than they did with the original toys. Except, maybe in terms of creativity...

Maybe it's time they changed, because what was working back then makes little sense now, especially with cries from fans for certain characters that seems to take ages to come out (if ever at all). The controversy over Quarry for instance.

Batman and characters of the sort can do that because they wear costumes that can easily be modified.

What couldn't they just make toys that look like the ones on TV? They had plenty of material, yet I heard complaints from the company about quantity.

[Shredder565]

That's fine with me because the 3rd movie was complete garbage.

Anyways I'm not really angry about any of this stuff they're doing for the 25th anniversary like pretty much everybody on Murph's blog is. I think it's really kinda cool that they're doing SOMETHING even if it doesn't really appeal to "hardcore fans"...whatever those are; come on a life-sized turtle van touring the country? that's kick-ass.

And actually I feel kinda spoiled by all the great turtle stuff we've already gotten. We've had 2 awesome cartoon series already and the last one is still continuing soon with a new art direction. We got 4 turtle movies, 3 of which were stellar with another one likely coming and Vol. 4 of the comics and Tales of are still going. We're getting the Forever War comics next year. So I think we're in great shape with the way the franchise is going and I don't really get why anyone is upset. After the first toon ended I thought for sure that would be the end of turtles on TV and the big screen but was wrong on both counts. We've got a lot to look forward to.

True, but as others pointed out, it's the lack of interesting stuff on other companies fronts that gets us upset.

For instance, Playmates putting out half butted(is the other word allowed?)
Turtle Variants only now. I mean, come on...Music Turtles? Is that really going to save the line? Why not just sponsor a new Coming Out of Their Shells Tour why they are at it... Playmates is absolutely finished as far as I'm concerned and it's time to focus on NECA instead for the cool stuff.

Volume 4 doesn't bother me as much as it does others. I don't think action scenes are fun to read in comics and don't translate as well in the ninja aspect of things...all it does is just make it a quicker read. I DO think the new book needs better art to be on par with other books. Jim's Turtles still look good, his architecture is great...but his humans suck. Let someone else pencil them and Jim can still pencil the other stuff. This has almost sort of started to happen with the covers of the books..and I hope it continues..

No Trade Paperbacks in book stores, and the company that ownes the license doesn't even intend to try and put them in there. And the reason for that is absolutely horrendous business practice if that's even close to true, and anyone else would have been fired for that decision at a bigger company.

The fact that most of Fast Forward dumbed down the entire franchise, and was mainly a direction that 4Kids wanted to go, clearly shows they might have lost touch with the franchise, if not interest.

The Life Sized, apparently toon accurate Turtle Van IS cool. No ones complaining about that. It's other things that get the 'hard core' ticked off :).

[NightwingAngelo]

The fact that most of Fast Forward dumbed down the entire franchise, and was mainly a direction that 4Kids wanted to go, clearly shows they might have lost touch with the franchise, if not interest.

That was also a big error if you ask me. If I stopped watching a show that isn't as popular as it should be at this point (Someone who has seen every episode including the Lost Season by the way), than how many others who thought the show was cool (and this show was the epitome of VERY COOL - a point I will argue to death anywhere) stopped watching when it went "Fast Forward"?

Now how many will come back when the show is returning to the present... how many even remember that is still exists... and how many even care anymore?

They dropped the ball, BIG TIME if you ask me.

[mumbo]

Fast Forward's ratings were a huge increase over Season 4. TMNT went from being in the bottom half of 4Kids' block ratings-wise to being at the top. So from that standpoint it was a success, even if it turned off some hardcore fans. Interest among the key demo (6-11 I believe) went way up. There's a reason they keep playing Fast Forward reruns to death you know.

One of the positives of 4Kids being the one to hold the TMNT license is that with pretty much any other company, this show would have fallen victim to the 65-episode production cap. Most shows like this get 5 13-episode seasons tops, but TMNT is approaching 150, and managed to get over 100 before the Fast Forward change.

With the show having such a long run, naturally it's gone into sort of a "commercialized" era and will probably continue to run different gimmicks each season until the end of the series. This is pretty much necessary for survival because overall interest waned quickly through Season 3 and 4. That's the natural course of a series like this. It's unfortunate but it's just how it happens.

Personally I think the TV series is in okay shape but all of the merchandise is in a sad state of affairs. It's true that the toylines and video games are godawful, and neither of those are going to do anything to attract new fans to the franchise. The movie is the only thing outside the TV series that initiated any interest.

[Shredder565]

^ This is the way Playmates has been making the toys since 1988. They've almost NEVER matched the cartoon designs and have tons of variations of the same designs.

So it's not like they're doing anything differently than they did with the original toys. Except, maybe in terms of creativity...

Which is why I was VERY wary of hearing that Playmates was involved in the new show as well. The Variants where OK for the original line back in the day, no matter HOW goofy half of them where... But these days it just won't fly with the collector market. Playmates should have been out of business by now...I mean, what other lines do they have besides TMNT where they can focus their best efforts?

[Andrew T. Hingson]

Fast Forward's ratings were a huge increase over Season 4. TMNT went from being in the bottom half of 4Kids' block ratings-wise to being at the top. So from that standpoint it was a success, even if it turned off some hardcore fans. Interest among the key demo (6-11 I believe) went way up. There's a reason they keep playing Fast Forward reruns to death you know.

One of the positives of 4Kids being the one to hold the TMNT license is that with pretty much any other company, this show would have fallen victim to the 65-episode production cap. Most shows like this get 5 13-episode seasons tops, but TMNT is approaching 150, and managed to get over 100 before the Fast Forward change.

With the show having such a long run, naturally it's gone into sort of a "commercialized" era and will probably continue to run different gimmicks each season until the end of the series. This is pretty much necessary for survival because overall interest waned quickly through Season 3 and 4. That's the natural course of a series like this. It's unfortunate but it's just how it happens.

Personally I think the TV series is in okay shape but all of the merchandise is in a sad state of affairs. It's true that the toylines and video games are godawful, and neither of those are going to do anything to attract new fans to the franchise. The movie is the only thing outside the TV series that initiated any interest.

As I recall... initially Fast Forward didn't do very well. Perhaps better than the low points of season 4 but not enough to warrent a drastic change. However, it eventually gained steam around the time TMNT 2007 came along. But the ironic thing was the lost episodes proved stronger than Fast Forward's ratings. I'd say they timed this all wrong. Season 5 should have aired when it was originally planned to or roughly there abouts. And if they had timed the 5th season to run around the time the movie hit theatres its very likey they would not have even needed to bother with Fast Forward.

In the end. It turned out fine but I thoroughy question if it was ever neccessary. On the bright side the lost season DID air and the Back to the Sewers season looks promising. But without a shadow of a doubt the one point when 4kids moved TMNT in the wrong direction was Fast Forward. They could have at least tried to keep it on the same level as the rest of the 2003 series.

[NightwingAngelo]

One of the positives of 4Kids being the one to hold the TMNT license is that with pretty much any other company, this show would have fallen victim to the 65-episode production cap. Most shows like this get 5 13-episode seasons tops, but TMNT is approaching 150, and managed to get over 100 before the Fast Forward change.

That's the only positive with 4Kids TV if you ask me. I agree that the show would have ended at 65 tops if it went to WB or something of the sorts (likely 52), and that's much too short for the TMNT.


As I recall... initially Fast Forward didn't do very well. Perhaps better than the low points of season 4 but not enough to warrent a drastic change. However, it eventually gained steam around the time TMNT 2007 came along. But the ironic thing was the lost episodes proved stronger than Fast Forward's ratings. I'd say they timed this all wrong. Season 5 should have aired when it was originally planned to or roughly there abouts. And if they had timed the 5th season to run around the time the movie hit theatres its very likey they would not have even needed to bother with Fast Forward.

Very true. I totally agree.


In the end. It turned out fine but I thoroughy question if it was ever neccessary. On the bright side the lost season DID air and the Back to the Sewers season looks promising. But without a shadow of a doubt the one point when 4kids moved TMNT in the wrong direction was Fast Forward. They could have at least tried to keep it on the same level as the rest of the 2003 series.

Ditto. It hasn't proven to be fatal yet, but Season 7 has got to be an absolute SHELL-RASIER of a season to put it back on track. Let's just hope that the damage was permanent.

[D Dubbs]

In terms of ratings, I wouldn't say that the lost season did better than Fast Forward. Yeah, the lost season beat out Spider-Man for a bit, but Fast Forward in fall 2007 was just as strong.

And besides, Fast Forward has been kicking ass on the CW4Kids, while classic TMNT is doing just mediocre on 4Kids TV.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

In terms of ratings, I wouldn't say that the lost season did better than Fast Forward. Yeah, the lost season beat out Spider-Man for a bit, but Fast Forward in fall 2007 was just as strong.

And besides, Fast Forward has been kicking ass on the CW4Kids, while classic TMNT is doing just mediocre on 4Kids TV.

More people get CW4kids than 4kidsTV so it's somewhat new. The hour of old episodes have been well played several times on 4kidsTV and also on CN.

And beating Spider-Man was no small task when it was in premieres.

And no in fall of 2007 Fast Forward was not that strong.

[D Dubbs]

And no in fall of 2007 Fast Forward was not that strong.
Fast Forward had a 1.8 with kids 6-11 and something like a 2.2 with boys 6-11 sometime in October 2007, which is better than any TMNT episode has done in the past year. And the rest of the fall ratings weren't far behind that.

[thundarr82]

I enjoyed TMNT (2007) the cgi Turtles film, which I feel is the best Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle franchise. I also enjoyed the original cartoon from the 80's. I would like to see a sequel to TMNT despite the fact that it did not make all that much money. It is funny when filmmakers choose to not feature the best villain in a particular series and claim that he or she will be in the sequel. Shredder and the Foot clan should have been featured instead of the non villain that was the King. I enjoyed seeing Shredder's Daughter, but there should have been more scenes of them fighting the turtles, like in Turtles (1990).

[Ian]

I disagree. Given the number of other good antagonists in the franchise, I feel that while featuring The Shredder (and by Shredder I mean "Oroku Saki") in TMNT may have helped in the box office and/or word of mouth--we'll never know--it would have only hurt the series in the long run. The Shredder is far too prominent as it is, and, comic books aside (both Archie and Mirage)--almost always ends up being overexposed. And the thing is, he doesn't merit the exposure, but since the original cartoon made him an inextricable part of the franchise, he's become expected, a given. And yet some of the best TMNT stories (comic book "City at War"; The Triceraton Invasion, the Archie comics' last future turtles arc) are ones where he isn't present.


Now, TMNT may not have been the best movie ever, or even a particularly great one. However, I don't blame the Shredder's abscence for it being uninispired. My greatest fear for a sequel-if-it-ever happens is that, indeed, they'll find a way to ressurect the Shredder, when more time desperately needs to be spent on that incarnation of Karai.

[Shredder565]

I personally would love them to fit the Utroms, Triceratons or LeathrHead into the next story somehow...

The problem with Shredder is that the old cartoon made him into too much of a wimp. He was more comic relief than any kind of serious threat. Add too that the fact that no real ninja action was ever on the first series other than slap stick and you get the persona that you cannot have a truly serious Shredder as a threat.

The new toon tried to rectify this, but all that was taken away when you make 'The Shredder' an alien Utrom. the threat factor is there, but not in the same sense.

If a Shredder is in the new film, he needs to be taken seriously and display some true martial arts skills. He and Karai fighting side by side, taking on the turtles two at a time, for instance and holding their own.. If they want a new take on him, you could say he returned from the dead with some new magic skills to boot...

[Master Moron]

I disagree. Given the number of other good antagonists in the franchise, I feel that while featuring The Shredder (and by Shredder I mean "Oroku Saki") in TMNT may have helped in the box office and/or word of mouth--we'll never know--it would have only hurt the series in the long run. The Shredder is far too prominent as it is, and, comic books aside (both Archie and Mirage)--almost always ends up being overexposed. And the thing is, he doesn't merit the exposure, but since the original cartoon made him an inextricable part of the franchise, he's become expected, a given. And yet some of the best TMNT stories (comic book "City at War"; The Triceraton Invasion, the Archie comics' last future turtles arc) are ones where he isn't present.


It didn't need The Shredder, but it needed a villain who was featured in the comics. I mean, it had Karai, but she barely did anything and they never explained who she was. Why the hell did they invent a new villain? Don't they have enough villains in the Ninja Turtles franchise already? I mean, fans would have loved to see Baxter Stockman, or the Rat King, or the Triceratons on the big screen. Why waste a movie on that Max Winters loser? It felt the same way Ninja Turtles 3 did. They wasted a movie on some nobody villains that no one gives a damn about.

As for your point about the best Ninja Turtles stories not featuring Shredder, one might ask, why didn't they make one of those into a movie? A City of War movie would have been a hell of a lot better than the sorry excuse for a plot that we got. Now, I imagine one might say, "but they already did that in the 4K!ds cartoon series" and therein lies the fundamental problem with the cgi animated movie. It assumes the viewer is already familiar with every previous incarnation of the Ninja Turtles when reality couldn't be further from the truth.

It just felt like the cgi movie was a collosal waste of time. Like the third movie, it was completely unnecessary. There were are so many Ninja Turtles stories that need to be told on the big screen and the cgi movie did none of them.

[NightwingAngelo]

It didn't need The Shredder, but it needed a villain who was featured in the comics. I mean, it had Karai, but she barely did anything and they never explained who she was. Why the hell did they invent a new villain? Don't they have enough villains in the Ninja Turtles franchise already? I mean, fans would have loved to see Baxter Stockman, or the Rat King, or the Triceratons on the big screen. Why waste a movie on that Max Winters loser? It felt the same way Ninja Turtles 3 did. They wasted a movie on some nobody villains that no one gives a damn about.

As for your point about the best Ninja Turtles stories not featuring Shredder, one might ask, why didn't they make one of those into a movie? A City of War movie would have been a hell of a lot better than the sorry excuse for a plot that we got. Now, I imagine one might say, "but they already did that in the 4K!ds cartoon series" and therein lies the fundamental problem with the cgi animated movie. It assumes the viewer is already familiar with every previous incarnation of the Ninja Turtles when reality couldn't be further from the truth.

It just felt like the cgi movie was a collosal waste of time. Like the third movie, it was completely unnecessary. There were are so many Ninja Turtles stories that need to be told on the big screen and the cgi movie did none of them.

I have to agree here.

Despite watching the show and loving the Ninja Turtles so much, I didn't feel much like seeing the new movie. I mean, I was following the news and such when it was coming out, but to this date I still haven't seen it and honestly could care less (unless it's on TV or something so I could casually watch it).

I don't give a spit about "Max Winters".

Like yo, where the Shell did Rat King go?!

One episode in the new series and we're like "Oh my God! This guy is the sickness!!!" and then... gone!

[Toon Out]

I disagree. Given the number of other good antagonists in the franchise, I feel that while featuring The Shredder (and by Shredder I mean "Oroku Saki") in TMNT may have helped in the box office and/or word of mouth--we'll never know--it would have only hurt the series in the long run.


I can't agree with that, yes, diehard fans who have followed the franchise closely over the years may be tired of the Shredder, but not the casual fan or potential new fans, for which the new movie would have been the first major exposer to the ninja turtles in years, Shredder hadn't been seen on the big screen for 16 years, so as far as the movies are concerned, Shredder is hardly over exposed. There is nothing wrong with having a highly identifiable arch villain.



It didn't need The Shredder, but it needed a villain who was featured in the comics. I mean, it had Karai, but she barely did anything and they never explained who she was. Why the hell did they invent a new villain? Don't they have enough villains in the Ninja Turtles franchise already? I mean, fans would have loved to see Baxter Stockman, or the Rat King, or the Triceratons on the big screen. Why waste a movie on that Max Winters loser? It felt the same way Ninja Turtles 3 did. They wasted a movie on some nobody villains that no one gives a damn about.


A ninja turtle movie doesn't need any old villains, be it from the comics or cartoons, to be good. The real problem with Max Winters was that he wasn't a well developed character, if you're going to introduce a new villain to the franchise, then you must give people a reason to care about the character, Winters only has a few scenes, and whats worse, he's not really the main villain, the stone generals are. As little screen time as Max Winters got, the stone generals, the real villains, got it worse. The generals must have had a combined 5 minutes of dialog, and nothing resembling a major fight scene with the turtles, it was bad enough they were saddled with generic looks and names.

[Master Moron]

A ninja turtle movie doesn't need any old villains, be it from the comics or cartoons, to be good.

Yes, it does. The success of a Ninja Turtles movie will depend a lot on nostalgia. You need to have villains that the audience is somewhat familiar with. You can't invent a new villain because the audience won't care. They didn't care about the samurais in Ninja Turtles 3 and they don't care about the generals in TMNT. They care about Baxter Stockman, The Rat King, and Leatherhead. Why not give them what they want to see? Go look at the Angry Video Game Nerd's review of the Ninja Turtles 3. He talks all about how much kids were anticipating what villain was going to be in the third movie and how disappointed he was that none of the villains from the cartoon were in the third movie. People who want to see a Ninja Turtles movie want to see Ninja Turtles villains. That's part of the reason they like the franchise. If they don't want to use any Ninja Turtles villains why make a Ninja Turtles movie in the first place?

[Toon Out]

Yes, it does. The success of a Ninja Turtles movie will depend a lot on nostalgia.


The success of a ninja turtle movie depends on quality and marketing. If the ninja turtle franchise can't survive without a few old villains(and lets face it, the turtles rogues gallery is neither that big or impressive), and doesn't possess the ability to introduce new characters and plots, then it's time to moth ball the franchise for another decade. If you want the franchise to grow, you need to move beyond the nostalgics.



Go look at the Angry Video Game Nerd's review of the Ninja Turtles 3. He talks all about how much kids were anticipating what villain was going to be in the third movie and how disappointed he was that none of the villains from the cartoon were in the third movie.
And look at AVGN's review on the new CGI movie, that he liked, which didn't feature any of the old villains.



If they don't want to use any Ninja Turtles villains why make a Ninja Turtles movie in the first place?To move the TMNT franchise forward, to inject new ideas and stories into TMNT universe, and to stop relying on stories told 20 years ago, a major reason the ninja turtle franchise has become stagnant over the years.

[Shredder565]

I have to agree here.

Despite watching the show and loving the Ninja Turtles so much, I didn't feel much like seeing the new movie. I mean, I was following the news and such when it was coming out, but to this date I still haven't seen it and honestly could care less (unless it's on TV or something so I could casually watch it).

I don't give a spit about "Max Winters".

Like yo, where the Shell did Rat King go?!

One episode in the new series and we're like "Oh my God! This guy is the sickness!!!" and then... gone!

I didn't care for this version of the Rat King at all. There was no real reason for him to return since he had no real purpose in this series other than as a monster. He doesn't want people intruding on his space and that seems to be his only purpose in the series. Probably why we never heard from him again..


I always figured that the Rat King in the original series was a rat somehow mutated into a human (alla Tatoo)....and that's how he under stood all the other rodents. That guy had a personality and purpose. This new Rat King didn't..

[Master Moron]

The success of a ninja turtle movie depends on quality and marketing. If the ninja turtle franchise can't survive without a few old villains(and lets face it, the turtles rogues gallery is neither that big or impressive), and doesn't possess the ability to introduce new characters and plots, then it's time to moth ball the franchise for another decade. If you want the franchise to grow, you need to move beyond the nostalgics.

Any superhero movie that doesn't use any villains from the comics and just invents its own tends to suck. See Catwoman or most of the Superman movies for examples. Do you really think The Dark Knight would have been as successful as it was if instead of The Joker and Two-Face they invented some lame new villains called Matt Summers and Mike Spring? No, it wouldn't. People want to see Batman's rogue galleries in a Batman movie. It doesn't mean the franchise sucks, it means that the villains are a part of the franchise.


And look at AVGN's review on the new CGI movie, that he liked, which didn't feature any of the old villains.

Watch the review again. He said that he liked the animation and the atmosphere but the story itself sucked. He also complained that they didn't use any of the villains from the old cartoon.


To move the TMNT franchise forward, to inject new ideas and stories into TMNT universe, and to stop relying on stories told 20 years ago, a major reason the ninja turtle franchise has become stagnant over the years.

What stories told 20 years ago? I must have missed the Ninja Turtles movie with Baxter Stockman and Leatherhead that was made 20 years ago. How can you claim that overuse on old stories have caused the Ninja Turtles movies to become stagnant when besides the first movie none of the movies have relied on the comics? If anything, the franchise has become stagnant due to them moving far, far away from the comic's stories with Ninja Turtles 3.

You seem to actually expect the audience who goes to a movie to be familiar with all the comics that the movie is based off of, which is completely ridiculous. Movies should have the ability to get an audience involved in the story even if they have no knowledge of the original source material. Most people who've seen The Dark Knight don't read Batman comics. Most people who've seen Iron Man don't read Iron Man comics. If Christopher Nolan just said "The Joker's story has already been told decades ago." and invented new villains his movie would be a box office bomb. The Joker and Two-Face are part of Batman's universe, just as The Shredder and Baxter Stockman are part of the Ninja Turtles universe. If those characters have become stale, then certainly the Ninja Turtles themselves have become stale. Why not just kill Leonardo, Donatello, Raphael, and Michaelangelo off and create new Ninja Turtles? I'll tell you why. Because people don't want to see new Ninja Turtles. They want to see the Ninja Turtles characters that made the franchise what it was, and that includes the villains.

[Antiyonder]

Yes, it does. The success of a Ninja Turtles movie will depend a lot on nostalgia. You need to have villains that the audience is somewhat familiar with. You can't invent a new villain because the audience won't care. They didn't care about the samurais in Ninja Turtles 3 and they don't care about the generals in TMNT. They care about Baxter Stockman, The Rat King, and Leatherhead. Why not give them what they want to see? Go look at the Angry Video Game Nerd's review of the Ninja Turtles 3. He talks all about how much kids were anticipating what villain was going to be in the third movie and how disappointed he was that none of the villains from the cartoon were in the third movie. People who want to see a Ninja Turtles movie want to see Ninja Turtles villains. That's part of the reason they like the franchise. If they don't want to use any Ninja Turtles villains why make a Ninja Turtles movie in the first place?

It all depends on if a frachise based program/movie is quality entertainment or not.

1. The Incredible Hulk TV Series from the 1970s was pretty successful despite lack of a single comic villain, the military or a character for that matter. Even the fans of the comic like the show.

2. While I saw the nerd's disappointment at the NT 3 lacking a familiar villain, his complaint wasn't entirely based off it. Besides, I get the idea that he would have enjoyed original villains if they were more that "The Samurai Guy" and "A Guy On A Horse".

[Ian]

The success of a Ninja Turtles movie will depend a lot on nostalgia.Which is, of course, the problem. Given that the most fondly remembered incarnation of the turtles is the original cartoon, and the (justified, in my opinion) reluctance of Peter Laird to invoke that era, it seems to me that you can't make a movie without expecting to turn of a large segment of the potential audience.

One of the problems with the Shredder is that, as far as archnemeses go, he's no Joker. Either you play him straight, in which case he's incredibly dull, as far as anything but looks go, or you play him for laughs, in which case he can't sustain a movie. Also, I've always seen him as a one-movie villain--the type that really needs to be killed off in order for the story to make sense, like the Green Goblin in the Spider-Man movies. However, while the Spidey-franchise has more than enough villains to pick up the slack, the TMNT are not so lucky. What's more, while the TMNT has always had a penchant for genrecrossing, the movies really can't do it without, again, turning off a large segment of the audience. Given that, I don't think creating a new villain was a bad idea--the problem was, as others have mentioned, that the generals weren't good ones.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the turtles just isn't a good property for a franchise. One movie, tops. That being said, there are two stories I think would be appropiate for a TMNT sequel. The first, a story where the turtles' mutations start reversing themselves and they have to figure out a way to return to normal; the second, an variation of the the "Future Shark Trilogy" plot--the turtles go to the future to save their future selves.

[NightwingAngelo]

I didn't care for this version of the Rat King at all. There was no real reason for him to return since he had no real purpose in this series other than as a monster. He doesn't want people intruding on his space and that seems to be his only purpose in the series. Probably why we never heard from him again..

Says who? The Rat King was only brought into the last season of the TMNT before "The Lost Season" (where the Turtles went to Japan and his involvement in the series would make no sense at all) and "Fast Forward" (where they zipped themselves 99 years into the future). How does that suddenly mean that he's probably not going to show up again in current time TMNT (or at least wasn't before the modifications made)?

That means little to nothing.

His purpose of being nothing more than a monster is also brought into question as well. He's built from a clone of Agent Bishop and DNA from Master Splinter (which at the time was known as the Slayer) . What reason is there for not re-appearing again and taking bits and pieces from the comics, such as hyonotizing and controlling rats, including Splinter. That and he even said he'd haunt the Turtles:

"They have fled by now, but I will haunt their nightmares for many days to come. I am the monster they will never escape. Everything fears me... everything, except... the rats."

And let's not forget the "Weapon X-like" flashbacks. He could easily become a character looking to find where he came from, and if not him at least the TMNT discovering what he really is, or Bishop discovering that his creation is still alive. That can lead to numerous possibilities if anything of the sort happens.


I always figured that the Rat King in the original series was a rat somehow mutated into a human (alla Tatoo)....and that's how he under stood all the other rodents. That guy had a personality and purpose. This new Rat King didn't..

This one has a mutated rat's DNA as part of him. We don't know how far that can be used.

[NightwingAngelo]

What stories told 20 years ago? I must have missed the Ninja Turtles movie with Baxter Stockman and Leatherhead that was made 20 years ago. How can you claim that overuse on old stories have caused the Ninja Turtles movies to become stagnant when besides the first movie none of the movies have relied on the comics? If anything, the franchise has become stagnant due to them moving far, far away from the comic's stories with Ninja Turtles 3.

You seem to actually expect the audience who goes to a movie to be familiar with all the comics that the movie is based off of, which is completely ridiculous. Movies should have the ability to get an audience involved in the story even if they have no knowledge of the original source material. Most people who've seen The Dark Knight don't read Batman comics. Most people who've seen Iron Man don't read Iron Man comics. If Christopher Nolan just said "The Joker's story has already been told decades ago." and invented new villains his movie would be a box office bomb. The Joker and Two-Face are part of Batman's universe, just as The Shredder and Baxter Stockman are part of the Ninja Turtles universe. If those characters have become stale, then certainly the Ninja Turtles themselves have become stale. Why not just kill Leonardo, Donatello, Raphael, and Michaelangelo off and create new Ninja Turtles? I'll tell you why. Because people don't want to see new Ninja Turtles. They want to see the Ninja Turtles characters that made the franchise what it was, and that includes the villains.

A-freakin'-MEN!

[NightwingAngelo]

Which is, of course, the problem. Given that the most fondly remembered incarnation of the turtles is the original cartoon, and the (justified, in my opinion) reluctance of Peter Laird to invoke that era, it seems to me that you can't make a movie without expecting to turn of a large segment of the potential audience.

One of the problems with the Shredder is that, as far as archnemeses go, he's no Joker. Either you play him straight, in which case he's incredibly dull, as far as anything but looks go, or you play him for laughs, in which case he can't sustain a movie. Also, I've always seen him as a one-movie villain--the type that really needs to be killed off in order for the story to make sense, like the Green Goblin in the Spider-Man movies. However, while the Spidey-franchise has more than enough villains to pick up the slack, the TMNT are not so lucky. What's more, while the TMNT has always had a penchant for genrecrossing, the movies really can't do it without, again, turning off a large segment of the audience. Given that, I don't think creating a new villain was a bad idea--the problem was, as others have mentioned, that the generals weren't good ones.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the turtles just isn't a good property for a franchise. One movie, tops. That being said, there are two stories I think would be appropiate for a TMNT sequel. The first, a story where the turtles' mutations start reversing themselves and they have to figure out a way to return to normal; the second, an variation of the the "Future Shark Trilogy" plot--the turtles go to the future to save their future selves.

I think they've just been making a lot of mistakes with their marketing and what hands hold certain parts of the franchise. Like I've mentioned before, when looking back on how things went you realise that the show was fighting for it's life since day one.

The only thing good that has come of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles TV show is the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle TV show. Ist has literally no support elsewhere.

The thing about the movie is that they went off on the wrong foot with using a new villain. This is not just because of there being a new villain created for the movie, but because they re-introduced us to the franchise on the big screen with the new villain.

It had been nearly 15 years since the last movie was made (and was received poorly by the general audience if I'm not mistaken). The TMNT was a distant and fading memory.

However when making the TMNT for 2007, rather than coming out with a bang (which they needed BADLY) and bringing out a major character, we got "Max Winters". That was yet again a screw up if you ask me. There was a need for a villain to market on more, or at least a villain that has made or was making a name for him/herself already and is already associated with the hero(es) (in this case our Ninja Turtles).

From what I've heard (but haven't seen) we got Karai, but she wasn't the main villain (or just barely one of them). They needed more.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying that new characters won't ever work, but looking at the situation where it was (first new TMNT movie in several years), they had to get the job done first in re-introducing the Ninja Turtles to the big screen.

Only then they should even think of even attempting to bring in a new characters, let alone a completely new villain to the Ninja Turtles.

[Shredder565]

while I didn't mind a new villain, I think he might have been created as a semi-concession. WB might have felt that they needed a big name to promote the movie with, and if the villain where Shredder, they couldn't really do that. So, boom.... Patrick Stewart was cast and Max Winters created.

The other thing is that Peter Laird has said he thinks that Shredder has been over exposed thanks to the original toon, and might have wanted to go in a new direction as well.

But, personally, I think they should have brought Shredder back at least for Movie one, and setup another villain for Movie 2 instead of the other way around. For instance, Shredder gets brought back from the dead or is 'miraculously healed' after being crushed by boards as Super Shredder. He runs a mutation lab in order to try and create bigger, badder mutants to defeat the turtles with. One of these guys goes after the turtles, the turtles defeat them and the Shredder goes off into hiding. However, another experiment, who turns out to be Leatherhead escapes into the sewers, and boom....established character setup for a new movie sequal without Shredder. You could even introduce Baxter Stockman as the mad mutagenic scientist.....

The problem with TMNT, as others stated, is that the generals where not clearly developed, had less lines than Max Winters, and just where not as interesting to look at..... It was not a bad movie by any stretch of the means, but it feld like a two hour episode of the TV series.

I also hope that if they go through the Live Action, CGI process, that we get far more realistic lookin turtles. Some of the running of Raph in his Night Watcher costume looks a bit weak and more like a video game charachter animation. A bit more noticeable when you see the movie in HD than on a theater screen..

[Master Moron]

Which is, of course, the problem. Given that the most fondly remembered incarnation of the turtles is the original cartoon, and the (justified, in my opinion) reluctance of Peter Laird to invoke that era, it seems to me that you can't make a movie without expecting to turn of a large segment of the potential audience.

But, the original cartoon used a lot of villains from the comic books. The first Ninja Turtles movie seemed to follow the storyline of the Mirage comics more than the cartoon. Yet, it managed to not alienate anyone. If they used Baxter Stockman, Leatherhead, or The Rat King it would attract people who watched the old cartoon, people who read the comics, and people who watch the new cartoon. It wouldn't alienate any of the audience.


One of the problems with the Shredder is that, as far as archnemeses go, he's no Joker. Either you play him straight, in which case he's incredibly dull, as far as anything but looks go, or you play him for laughs, in which case he can't sustain a movie. Also, I've always seen him as a one-movie villain--the type that really needs to be killed off in order for the story to make sense, like the Green Goblin in the Spider-Man movies. However, while the Spidey-franchise has more than enough villains to pick up the slack, the TMNT are not so lucky. What's more, while the TMNT has always had a penchant for genrecrossing, the movies really can't do it without, again, turning off a large segment of the audience. Given that, I don't think creating a new villain was a bad idea--the problem was, as others have mentioned, that the generals weren't good ones.


I'm not sure how people can claim that there aren't enough villains in the Ninja Turtles franchise. If you include all the comics, movies, cartoons, video games, and toys, there must be over a hundred villains. Yeah, most of them couldn't sustain a movie, but neither could Max Winters. I'd rather see a lame villain like Slash than a nobody like Max Winters, and I suspect that the general viewing public would as well. Even if you take away all the lame villains, there are still good villains who could be the focus of a movie. Baxter Stockman could easily be the focus of a movie, as could Leatherhead or the Triceratons. Hell, you could almost rewrite Max Winters as Baxter Stockman. Instead of the lame backstory, just have Baxter create a device that opens up a hole to another dimension, but the only thing that can power it is monsters. You'd have the same general plot, only you'd have a villain that the public would want to see. You could even throw some mousers into the movie.


while I didn't mind a new villain, I think he might have been created as a semi-concession. WB might have felt that they needed a big name to promote the movie with, and if the villain where Shredder, they couldn't really do that. So, boom.... Patrick Stewart was cast and Max Winters created.


Why couldn't they have just casted a famous person as Shredder? Besides, don't they have enough big names with Sarah Michelle Geller and Laurence Fishburne?

[Toon Out]

Any superhero movie that doesn't use any villains from the comics and just invents its own tends to suck. See Catwoman or most of the Superman movies for examples. Do you really think The Dark Knight would have been as successful as it was if instead of The Joker and Two-Face they invented some lame new villains called Matt Summers and Mike Spring? No, it wouldn't. People want to see Batman's rogue galleries in a Batman movie. It doesn't mean the franchise sucks, it means that the villains are a part of the franchise.


You seem to be arguing recognition instead of quality, would The Dark Knight have been as profitable if it had used a new villain, probably not, would the movie had the same type of success if the movie was bad, definitely not. Having villains from the comics didn't save Batman and Robin from being an awful movie, not to mention most comic book based movies from yesteryear. And movies like Catwoman and the Superman movies were badly written and directed and generally bad movies on their own, not because they lacked recognizable villains from the comics.




Watch the review again. He said that he liked the animation and the atmosphere but the story itself sucked. He also complained that they didn't use any of the villains from the old cartoon.
He said he would have prefered familiar territory, like Krang, Dimesion X, and the Technodrome( none of which will ever likely happen), but at the end of the day he said it was a good movie and encouraged others to go see it.





What stories told 20 years ago? I must have missed the Ninja Turtles movie with Baxter Stockman and Leatherhead that was made 20 years ago. How can you claim that overuse on old stories have caused the Ninja Turtles movies to become stagnant when besides the first movie none of the movies have relied on the comics? If anything, the franchise has become stagnant due to them moving far, far away from the comic's stories with Ninja Turtles 3.
I was refering to the Ninja Turtles franchise as a whole (as to the topic of this thread), but perhaps I didn't make that clear, I apologize.



You seem to actually expect the audience who goes to a movie to be familiar with all the comics that the movie is based off of, which is completely ridiculous. Movies should have the ability to get an audience involved in the story even if they have no knowledge of the original source material. So it shouldn't matter whether or not the movie to
Most people who've seen The Dark Knight don't read Batman comics. Most people who've seen Iron Man don't read Iron Man comics. So it shouldn't matter whether or not the movie has older villains in it, the general public won't care about villains they are unfamiliar with as long as the story itself is good.






One of the problems with the Shredder is that, as far as archnemeses go, he's no Joker. Either you play him straight, in which case he's incredibly dull, as far as anything but looks go, or you play him for laughs, in which case he can't sustain a movie.


There is no law saying Shedder needs to be a dull character if written straight, a poorly written Joker can be just as dull.



The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the turtles just isn't a good property for a franchise. One movie, tops. Any property that is written well is good enough for a franchise.


while I didn't mind a new villain, I think he might have been created as a semi-concession. WB might have felt that they needed a big name to promote the movie with, and if the villain where Shredder, they couldn't really do that. So, boom.... Patrick Stewart was cast and Max Winters created.


Winters was created well before anyone one was ever considered for the voice roles, and they could have cast a big name for the Shredder if they wanted to, not that WB actually did much to promote this movie anyway.



But, the original cartoon used a lot of villains from the comic books. The first Ninja Turtles movie seemed to follow the storyline of the Mirage comics more than the cartoon. Yet, it managed to not alienate anyone. If they used Baxter Stockman, Leatherhead, or The Rat King it would attract people who watched the old cartoon, people who read the comics, and people who watch the new cartoon. It wouldn't alienate any of the audience.


I don't believe anyone is arguing that using older characters would alienate people, especially a general audience who wouldn't really care one way or another, although depending on which version of Shredder, Stockman, or Leatherhead you're talking about, you can't avoid alienating one faction of the TMNT fandom.



I'm not sure how people can claim that there aren't enough villains in the Ninja Turtles franchise. If you include all the comics, movies, cartoons, video games, and toys, there must be over a hundred villains.
Peter Laird is only interested in the comicbook villains( and maybe some from the New Toon).

[Antiyonder]

I'd rather see a lame villain like Slash than a nobody like Max Winters, and I suspect that the general viewing public would as well.

And again, I direct you to The Incredible Hulk TV Series which had no villains and good writing. The only antagonist was a guy from a newspaper with a poor reputation.

Yet the show is fondly remembered by even Hulk fanboys.

[Master Moron]

So it shouldn't matter whether or not the movie has older villains in it, the general public won't care about villains they are unfamiliar with as long as the story itself is good.

Yes, they will. The number 1 complaint I hear about TMNT is that it didn't have Shredder in it. You keep on going on and on about good writing. You seem to think nothing else matters, as long as its well written. That's not true. When you're dealing with a well known franchise you need to make sure that you satisfy its fans. There was an earlier draft of a Superman movie where Superman wore a black suit and couldn't fly. No matter how well the movie was written, Superman fans wouldn't like a Superman who didn't fly around in a red and blue suit.


I don't believe anyone is arguing that using older characters would alienate people, especially a general audience who wouldn't really care one way or another, although depending on which version of Shredder, Stockman, or Leatherhead you're talking about, you can't avoid alienating one faction of the TMNT fandom.


That's not true. No one complained about the different origins that Nolan gave to the villains in the Batman movies.

[Antiyonder]

Yes, they will. The number 1 complaint I hear about TMNT is that it didn't have Shredder in it. You keep on going on and on about good writing. You seem to think nothing else matters, as long as its well written. That's not true. When you're dealing with a well known franchise you need to make sure that you satisfy its fans. There was an earlier draft of a Superman movie where Superman wore a black suit and couldn't fly. No matter how well the movie was written, Superman fans wouldn't like a Superman who didn't fly around in a red and blue suit.

Then explain The Incredible Hulk TV Series.

[Master Moron]

Then explain The Incredible Hulk TV Series.

I can't. I haven't seen it since I was a kid and I don't remember much about it. Though, I will say that for many people, the old Incredible Hulk TV series was their first introduction to the character. With characters like the Ninja Turtles and Batman, any movie that's made will not be the audience's first introduction to the character.

[Antiyonder]

I can't. I haven't seen it since I was a kid and I don't remember much about it. Though, I will say that for many people, the old Incredible Hulk TV series was their first introduction to the character. With characters like the Ninja Turtles and Batman, any movie that's made will not be the audience's first introduction to the character.

Except that even comic fans have given a favorable comment on the show. It may not have the military or a supervillain, but it does keep to the theme that the Hulk is a curse for the human who turns into him.

Besides, Batman & Robin contained plenty of comic characters, including three villains and still earned scorn from many fans.

[Ed Liu]

Yes, they will. The number 1 complaint I hear about TMNT is that it didn't have Shredder in it.

That may be the number 1 complaint you hear from TMNT fans about the TMNT movies. The number 1 complaint you hear from normal people and critics is that the movies are big and dumb and juvenile (not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you).

The number 1 complaint about the Spider-Man movie from comic book fans before it debuted was that they gave him organic webshooters. Normal people DID NOT CARE about that at all (except maybe to make the usual joke about, "Shouldn't the webs come out of his butt?" that was funny the first time you heard it when you were 12).

You're making a giant generalization based on an extremely limited and extremely skewed sample space. If I poll attendees at the Republican National Convention about how much they approve the respective candidates, I shouldn't be surprised when the majority of them say that they approve of McCain more than Obama, and definitely can't use those results to conclude that McCain will win the election.

-- Ed

[Toon Out]

Yes, they will. The number 1 complaint I hear about TMNT is that it didn't have Shredder in it. You keep on going on and on about good writing. You seem to think nothing else matters, as long as its well written. That's not true. When you're dealing with a well known franchise you need to make sure that you satisfy its fans. There was an earlier draft of a Superman movie where Superman wore a black suit and couldn't fly. No matter how well the movie was written, Superman fans wouldn't like a Superman who didn't fly around in a red and blue suit.

Firstly, we are talking about a "general audience", not fans who are more familiar with the franchise, the people who have no idea who stockman and Rat King are (and no, they are not as well Known as the Joker or Lex Luthor), even if they are somewhat familiar with the ninja turtles in general.

Second, looking at the reviews at rottentomatoes.com, I'd say more people were disappointed in the PG level action, underdeveloped plot and villains, and small screen time that Donatello and Mikey got. And then there are those who wanted a less serious movie (not necessarily featuring old cartoon characters).

And lastly, I would hope any ninja turtle fan would want a movie that is well written and respects the characters, TMNT didn't try to change the turtles, Splinter, April, Casey, or Karai to the extent that Superman was changed in your example.



That's not true. No one complained about the different origins that Nolan gave to the villains in the Batman movies.I can definitly tell you old comic book fans would throw a fit if the old cartoon versions were used, and old cartoon fans wouldn't like the comic book versions since they are fundamentally different( not just different origins), and the general audience won't care, especially if you believe that Baxter Stockman and Max Winters are that interchangable.

[Master Moron]

Besides, Batman & Robin contained plenty of comic characters, including three villains and still earned scorn from many fans.

Because it ruined those three villains.


That may be the number 1 complaint you hear from TMNT fans about the TMNT movies. The number 1 complaint you hear from normal people and critics is that the movies are big and dumb and juvenile (not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you).

Well, TMNT was dumb and juvenile, but I don't think the general audience really expected the movie to be a work of art. Most of the people who saw the movie probably watched Ninja Turtles as a kid.


The number 1 complaint about the Spider-Man movie from comic book fans before it debuted was that they gave him organic webshooters. Normal people DID NOT CARE about that at all (except maybe to make the usual joke about, "Shouldn't the webs come out of his butt?" that was funny the first time you heard it when you were 12).

Really? The number 1 complaint I heard was that the Green Goblin's costume looked stupid.


Firstly, we are talking about a "general audience", not fans who are more familiar with the franchise, the people who have no idea who stockman and Rat King are (and no, they are not as well Known as the Joker or Lex Luthor), even if they are somewhat familiar with the ninja turtles in general.

Ra's Al Ghul and Two-Face aren't that familiar to a general audience either.


Second, looking at the reviews at rottentomatoes.com, I'd say more people were disappointed in the PG level action, underdeveloped plot and villains, and small screen time that Donatello and Mikey got. And then there are those who wanted a less serious movie (not necessarily featuring old cartoon characters).

And if they took a villain and a plot from the comic books then they wouldn't complain about the underdeveloped villains and plot, now would they?


And lastly, I would hope any ninja turtle fan would want a movie that is well written and respects the characters, TMNT didn't try to change the turtles, Splinter, April, Casey, or Karai to the extent that Superman was changed in your example.

I don't see how replacing a character with a new one is any different than changing a character.


I can definitly tell you old comic book fans would throw a fit if the old cartoon versions were used, versions since they are fundamentally different( not just different origins), and the general audience won't care, especially if you believe that Baxter and old cartoon fans wouldn't like the comic book Stockman and Max Winters are that interchangable.

There really isn't that much of a difference between the versions of Baxter Stockman. He was always a crazy scientist who makes mousers. The main difference is whether he becomes a cyborg or a fly, which wouldn't make that much of a difference to me. Actually, what would be really neat is if he became a cyborg fly.

[Antiyonder]

Because it ruined those three villains.

But you insist that the audience will turn a blind eye to quality if the movie caters to their nostalgia feelings, and Batman & Robin does just that.

You even said that you'd rather have a lame villain that familiar rather than one who is new and decent.

[Toon Out]

Ra's Al Ghul and Two-Face aren't that familiar to a general audience either.


And Obadiah Stane from Iron Man was an even more obscure villain, which proves that a general audience doesn't really care a great deal about villains and plots from the source material.



And if they took a villain and a plot from the comic books then they wouldn't complain about the underdeveloped villains and plot, now would they?
If the villain and plot from the comic books were given the same amount of screen time that Max Winters and the monster plot was given, then yes, people would complain that the villains and plot were underdeveloped, and rightfully so.



I don't see how replacing a character with a new one is any different than changing a character.
No character in TMNT replaced an existing character, introducing a new character along with a new story is different from replacing or changing a character.



There really isn't that much of a difference between the versions of Baxter Stockman. He was always a crazy scientist who makes mousers. The main difference is whether he becomes a cyborg or a fly, which wouldn't make that much of a difference to me. Actually, what would be really neat is if he became a cyborg fly.Old Cartoon Baxter was a stereotypical comedic cartoon mad scientist lackey (which in the context of the old show was fine), Mirage comic book Baxter was a psychopath and his own villain, the difference between both is about the same as Old Cartoon Shredder and Mirage Shredder.

[Master Moron]

But you insist that the audience will turn a blind eye to quality if the movie caters to their nostalgia feelings, and Batman & Robin does just that.

No, it doesn't. If you're implying that Batman & Robin was similar to the Adam West show then you're forgetting that Poison Ivy and Bane weren't in the old show. Not to mention Mr. Freeze was almost a completely different character from the one in the old show.


You even said that you'd rather have a lame villain that familiar rather than one who is new and decent.

That's really twisting around my words. I actually said that I'd rather have a lame villain than Max Winters, who's not decent. As for whether I agree with the statement you made, it's rather irrelevant, since they haven't used the good villains in the movies yet. There's no need to go to the lame ones.


And Obadiah Stane from Iron Man was an even more obscure villain, which proves that a general audience doesn't really care a great deal about villains and plots from the source material.

No, that proves that audiences will even accept an obscure villain from the original source material as opposed to a made up villain.


If the villain and plot from the comic books were given the same amount of screen time that Max Winters and the monster plot was given, then yes, people would complain that the villains and plot were underdeveloped, and rightfully so.

No character in TMNT replaced an existing character, introducing a new character along with a new story is different from replacing or changing a character.

Old Cartoon Baxter was a stereotypical comedic cartoon mad scientist lackey (which in the context of the old show was fine), Mirage comic book Baxter was a psychopath and his own villain, the difference between both is about the same as Old Cartoon Shredder and Mirage Shredder.

I'm really not sure what your point is. Didn't TMNT do well its first week and then bomb after that? That seems to indicate that people want to see a new Ninja Turtles movie, but this wasn't the Ninja Turtles movie they wanted to see. If they took a story from the comic books, then it would have a better plot than TMNT so critics wouldn't bash it as much, and the Ninja Turtles fans would like it because it would have characters they are more familiar with. Why are you so opposed to that? What would be the point in making a new story when there's countless stories that haven't been used yet? There is absolutely no advantage in making a new villain. It won't please the critics, it won't please the fans, and it won't please the general audience. So, why do you insist on that being the way to go? Every time they try it with the Ninja Turtles movies, it blows.

[Shift]

And Obadiah Stane from Iron Man was an even more obscure villain, which proves that a general audience doesn't really care a great deal about villains and plots from the source material.

No, that proves that audiences will even accept an obscure villain from the original source material as opposed to a made up villain.
Doesn't it just prove that audiences accept ANY villain as long as they're, y'know, villainous?

[Toon Out]

I'm really not sure what your point is. Didn't TMNT do well its first week and then bomb after that? That seems to indicate that people want to see a new Ninja Turtles movie, but this wasn't the Ninja Turtles movie they wanted to see.




No, it's an indication of Warner Bros poor marketing and scheduling of TMNT, with a 25 million worldwide marketing budget (and no, that's not good), TMNT was never really pushed by WB as a big time movie and really got the shaft in the wake of 300. It was released at time when the theaters were crowed with movies aiming at the same demographic as TMNT, whether it be kids or young adults, most of which had better marketing. And even though I liked the movie, the weaknesses of TMNT remain, it was underdeveloped and featured little in the way of action and fighting, points that hardly make it a must for repeat viewing.





If they took a story from the comic books, then it would have a better plot than TMNT so critics wouldn't bash it as much, and the Ninja Turtles fans would like it because it would have characters they are more familiar with.
Why are you so opposed to that? What would be the point in making a new story when there's countless stories that haven't been used yet?
There is absolutely no advantage in making a new villain. It won't please the critics, it won't please the fans, and it won't please the general audience. So, why do you insist on that being the way to go? Every time they try it with the Ninja Turtles movies, it blows.I'm not opposed to using plots and characters from the comics, I'm opposed to the assertion that they are absolutely needed for a TMNT movie to be good and that a TMNT movie without them is automatically bad. If you were to replace the monster plot scenes from TMNT with scenes based on a plot from the comics without expanding upon them, you would get the same reaction from critics and the general audience, and may even draw more criticism from fans.

Let's say we started from scratch, and built a movie based on a plot from the comics, if it's poorly executed would it still please critics, fans, and the general audience, even if its a story they're familiar with? No. If a new story with new characters was interesting and well developed, and featured enough eye candy, would critics, fans, and the general audience be pleased? Yes, it's all about execution.



Doesn't it just prove that audiences accept ANY villain as long as they're, y'know, villainous?

Yes, and interesting.

[Master Moron]

No, it's an indication of Warner Bros poor marketing and scheduling of TMNT, with a 25 million worldwide marketing budget (and no, that's not good), TMNT was never really pushed by WB as a big time movie and really got the shaft in the wake of 300. It was released at time when the theaters were crowed with movies aiming at the same demographic as TMNT, whether it be kids or young adults, most of which had better marketing. And even though I liked the movie, the weaknesses of TMNT remain, it was underdeveloped and featured little in the way of action and fighting, points that hardly make it a must for repeat viewing.

Then why did it do good its first week?




I'm not opposed to using plots and characters from the comics, I'm opposed to the assertion that they are absolutely needed for a TMNT movie to be good and that a TMNT movie without them is automatically bad. If you were to replace the monster plot scenes from TMNT with scenes based on a plot from the comics without expanding upon them, you would get the same reaction from critics and the general audience, and may even draw more criticism from fans.

Let's say we started from scratch, and built a movie based on a plot from the comics, if it's poorly executed would it still please critics, fans, and the general audience, even if its a story they're familiar with? No. If a new story with new characters was interesting and well developed, and featured enough eye candy, would critics, fans, and the general audience be pleased? Yes, it's all about execution.


You just don't seem to understand why people like comic book movies. When people go to see a comic book movie they like seeing what they loved about a franchise on the big screen being presented to a mainstream audience. This is true regardless of which version of the franchise they liked, be it the comic books or the cartoon.

For instance, I used to watch Batman: The Animated Series as a kid. Two-Face was my absolute favorite villain as a kid. Part of the reason I loved The Dark Knight was that the movie finally presented the character to a mainstream audience. Comic and cartoon fans tend to be rather niche. The mainstream audience really doesn't tend to be into those types of things. But, with a movie you have a mainstream audience experiencing something that the niche has appreciated for a long time. It's like the niche audience is saying to the mainstream "See, this is what I've been telling you about. Isn't it awesome?" If you just made up a completely new villain for The Dark Knight that entire dynamic would be completely gone. The mainstream audience may like it, but the previous fans of the franchise would be disappointed that the mainstream audience would never truly understand what they love about the franchise. Comic book movies should have comic book villains because its part of the reason people love the franchises.

You claim to not be opposed to using plots and characters from the comics, but rather claim that they aren't necessary. Well, it's like whipped cream and pumpkin pie. Whipped cream isn't necessary to eat pumpkin pie, but why in the hell would you want to eat pumpkin pie without it? There's absolutely no reason not to use villains and plots from the comics, so why should they even consider using new ones. Now, maybe if they've already made half a dozen Ninja Turtles movies and they've already used up all the good plots, then fine, make a new villain. But, at this point in the franchise, when they've barely used any of the plots that are already out there, there is absolutely no reason to use a new villain. The fans want whipped cream on their pie. There's a bottle of whipped cream right there. So, why the hell are you pouring honey on their pie? Maybe honey tastes good on pie, who the hell knows? But, they want whipped cream and there's a bottle right there so why don't you wait till you're out of whipped cream before you start screwing around with new things to put on pie?

[Shredder565]

Then why did it do good its first week?


Now you did it....I want some chocolate Pie and I want it now ;)..

but you make a good point. Most people associate Shredder with he turtles franchise. They may know of the Rat King, or Baxter, or even the Triceratons thanks to the new cartoon...but the one they remember most is Shredder. He should have been in the new movie and introduced a second villain to take over the rains of the second...

Max Winters was not a bad character (Despite being a Mr.Incredible rip of in design), but he didn't need to be in the first movie. I'm STILL hoping they team up Shredder with an evil Utrom named Krang and his army of rock soldiers, but that's wishfull thinking ;)..

[Mondo Gecko]

I'm STILL hoping they team up Shredder with an evil Utrom named Krang and his army of rock soldiers, but that's wishfull thinking ;)..

I'm with you. I've been clamoring for a movie with Shredder, Krang, The Techndrome, Bebop & Rocksteady since I walked out dissapointed after the second movie. Think how increridble they would all look with today's special effects. It would be awesome

[Shredder565]

I'm with you. I've been clamoring for a movie with Shredder, Krang, The Techndrome, Bebop & Rocksteady since I walked out dissapointed after the second movie. Think how increridble they would all look with today's special effects. It would be awesome

Even a Direct to DVD movie with movie like special effects would be awesome....If they started on it now, it'd be ready for the 25th anniversary of the original series... but it'd only work if all the original VA's where back.

I'd also like it to be set like one of the Dragonball Z movies. Same universe, no real continutiy based form the series. It could happen any time, and where and is just a new adventure with old characters :)

[LoneToonman]

I still like some of the stuff they do with that franchise. But let's face it, ever since 4Kids got a hold of it, it just ain't what it used to be, especially in terms of sound quality and profits...4Kids needs to realize how bad it is when it comes to the way they make their shows and anime sound. Somebody get 4Kids a better casting director (that's what you call the lady or guy who picks out the voice actors, isn't it), for god sake! That and much of their actual designs. The best looking new 4Kids show the "revisioning" of Chaotic, has character designs that look beautiful. The rest of their "Western style shows." Not really doing it for me. I watch those when nothing else is on. To me a lot of what 4Kids does lacks universal aesthetic appeal. I suspect that's part of why they're not as popular with the fans as certain other studios are.

[LoneToonman]

Then why did it do good its first week?





You just don't seem to understand why people like comic book movies. When people go to see a comic book movie they like seeing what they loved about a franchise on the big screen being presented to a mainstream audience. This is true regardless of which version of the franchise they liked, be it the comic books or the cartoon.

For instance, I used to watch Batman: The Animated Series as a kid. Two-Face was my absolute favorite villain as a kid. Part of the reason I loved The Dark Knight was that the movie finally presented the character to a mainstream audience. Comic and cartoon fans tend to be rather niche. The mainstream audience really doesn't tend to be into those types of things. But, with a movie you have a mainstream audience experiencing something that the niche has appreciated for a long time. It's like the niche audience is saying to the mainstream "See, this is what I've been telling you about. Isn't it awesome?" If you just made up a completely new villain for The Dark Knight that entire dynamic would be completely gone. The mainstream audience may like it, but the previous fans of the franchise would be disappointed that the mainstream audience would never truly understand what they love about the franchise. Comic book movies should have comic book villains because its part of the reason people love the franchises.

You claim to not be opposed to using plots and characters from the comics, but rather claim that they aren't necessary. Well, it's like whipped cream and pumpkin pie. Whipped cream isn't necessary to eat pumpkin pie, but why in the hell would you want to eat pumpkin pie without it? There's absolutely no reason not to use villains and plots from the comics, so why should they even consider using new ones. Now, maybe if they've already made half a dozen Ninja Turtles movies and they've already used up all the good plots, then fine, make a new villain. But, at this point in the franchise, when they've barely used any of the plots that are already out there, there is absolutely no reason to use a new villain. The fans want whipped cream on their pie. There's a bottle of whipped cream right there. So, why the hell are you pouring honey on their pie? Maybe honey tastes good on pie, who the hell knows? But, they want whipped cream and there's a bottle right there so why don't you wait till you're out of whipped cream before you start screwing around with new things to put on pie?

Yeah that does seem a bit odd that that happens. People will like to see the old characters from new franchises, AS LONG AS the characters are presented and branded and brought to audiences in some way that is still relevant to today's society. There's a huge difference between something like, say Yu Gi Oh GX or the upcoming Chaotic series and something incredibly overly mainstream and pretentious like, say, the Star Wars prequels, which nerds everywhere still hate to this day with a passion. Not that the mainstream audience cares. But the hardcore nerds sure do, and in one sense their opinion is just as important.

[Shift]

I still like some of the stuff they do with that franchise. But let's face it, ever since 4Kids got a hold of it, it just ain't what it used to be, especially in terms of sound quality and profits...4Kids needs to realize how bad it is when it comes to the way they make their shows and anime sound. Somebody get 4Kids a better casting director (that's what you call the lady or guy who picks out the voice actors, isn't it), for god sake! That and much of their actual designs. The best looking new 4Kids show the "revisioning" of Chaotic, has character designs that look beautiful. The rest of their "Western style shows." Not really doing it for me. I watch those when nothing else is on. To me a lot of what 4Kids does lacks universal aesthetic appeal. I suspect that's part of why they're not as popular with the fans as certain other studios are.
That may be your opinion, as but I'm pretty sure the general consensus has been that as far as TMNT goes, it's basically the best televised version of the series we've ever had as well as one of 4Kids' most worthwhile works. They're bad with anime, but when it comes to home-brewed productions, they're quite good.

[Toon Out]

Then why did it do good its first week?


Because they're TMNT, still a very popular and visible franchise, and like many similar popular franchises it was extremely front loaded by die hard fans who rushed to go see it opening weekend( half of the opening weekend audience were made up of viewers over the age of 13), a segment WB completely ignored, TMNT should have done even better then it did opening weekend.





You just don't seem to understand why people like comic book movies. When people go to see a comic book movie they like seeing what they loved about a franchise on the big screen being presented to a mainstream audience. This is true regardless of which version of the franchise they liked, be it the comic books or the cartoon. For instance, I used to watch Batman: The Animated Series as a kid. Two-Face was my absolute favorite villain as a kid. Part of the reason I loved The Dark Knight was that the movie finally presented the character to a mainstream audience. Comic and cartoon fans tend to be rather niche. The mainstream audience really doesn't tend to be into those types of things. But, with a movie you have a mainstream audience experiencing something that the niche has appreciated for a long time. It's like the niche audience is saying to the mainstream "See, this is what I've been telling you about. Isn't it awesome?" If you just made up a completely new villain for The Dark Knight that entire dynamic would be completely gone. The mainstream audience may like it, but the previous fans of the franchise would be disappointed that the mainstream audience would never truly understand what they love about the franchise. Comic book movies should have comic book villains because its part of the reason people love the franchises.

You claim to not be opposed to using plots and characters from the comics, but rather claim that they aren't necessary. Well, it's like whipped cream and pumpkin pie. Whipped cream isn't necessary to eat pumpkin pie, but why in the hell would you want to eat pumpkin pie without it? There's absolutely no reason not to use villains and plots from the comics, so why should they even consider using new ones. Now, maybe if they've already made half a dozen Ninja Turtles movies and they've already used up all the good plots, then fine, make a new villain. But, at this point in the franchise, when they've barely used any of the plots that are already out there, there is absolutely no reason to use a new villain. The fans want whipped cream on their pie. There's a bottle of whipped cream right there. So, why the hell are you pouring honey on their pie? Maybe honey tastes good on pie, who the hell knows? But, they want whipped cream and there's a bottle right there so why don't you wait till you're out of whipped cream before you start screwing around with new things to put on pie?Again you are arguing sentimental nostalgia and personal preferences as opposed to quality, will fans always want to see familiar characters and plots, of course they would, I will not argue against that, but does that mean they will be closed minded and will automatically reject anything that is new? You need to give fans more credit then that.

If you want examples of comic book movies that didn't follow the plots of the comics or didn't feature familiar villains, yet still were critically and financially successful look no further then this years Hellboy 2 and Wanted, the latter of which, other then sharing the same name, was completely different from the comics.

Also, lets remove the notion that TMNT didn't use any familiar villains, since the movie did feature Karai and the Foot Clan as antagonists. And as to the fans reaction to the movie, Mirage comic book fans seemed to enjoy TMNT far more then Old Toon fans, since it was darker then the previous movies and kept much the elements of the old cartoon out, exact reason many of the Old Toon fans disliked the movie.



but you make a good point. Most people associate Shredder with he turtles franchise. They may know of the Rat King, or Baxter, or even the Triceratons thanks to the new cartoon...but the one they remember most is Shredder. He should have been in the new movie and introduced a second villain to take over the rains of the second...

Max Winters was not a bad character (Despite being a Mr.Incredible rip of in design), but he didn't need to be in the first movie. I'm STILL hoping they team up Shredder with an evil Utrom named Krang and his army of rock soldiers, but that's wishfull thinking ;)..


After 16 years, I believe it was a mistake not having the Shredder, in some cameo form. It would have been best to open TMNT with the "final" battle between the turtles and the Shredder, and have him killed off( we all know he is going to be resurrected anyway), then transition into the new story, that would silence most of the people wanting to see Shredder, because they actually got to see Shredder. Also keep in mind Max Winters was a disposable villain because a) he was always meant to die and b) he was not really a villain, the main focus of the movie was to be the relationships between Leo and Raph as well as the relationship between Casey and April (which was cut from final version).

[veemonjosh]

After 16 years, I believe it was a mistake not having the Shredder, in some cameo form.

He DID have a cameo, during the monologue in the first three minutes of the film. :sweat:

Granted, it was an image taken from the comics and colorized, but still.

[LoneToonman]

That may be your opinion, as but I'm pretty sure the general consensus has been that as far as TMNT goes, it's basically the best televised version of the series we've ever had as well as one of 4Kids' most worthwhile works. They're bad with anime, but when it comes to home-brewed productions, they're quite good.

Don't get me wrong though (please). I never really got into their version of TMNT. I'm too big of a fan of the old version of that show. I just love it TOO much. But please don't take what I say the wrong way. Some of what 4Kids do is very good, as manifested in places like the TZ forums and whatnot. And they have an insatiable fanbase. They have that going for them. I absolutely love Chaotic and Di Gata Defenders. I watch Chaotic instead of Family Guy in my bed everytime it gets aired, just about.

[Toon Out]

He DID have a cameo, during the monologue in the first three minutes of the film. :sweat:

Granted, it was an image taken from the comics and colorized, but still.

The Mousers make a cameo too, well just their feet.:)

[Shift]

Don't get me wrong though (please). I never really got into their version of TMNT. I'm too big of a fan of the old version of that show. I just love it TOO much. But please don't take what I say the wrong way. Some of what 4Kids do is very good, as manifested in places like the TZ forums and whatnot. And they have an insatiable fanbase. They have that going for them. I absolutely love Chaotic and Di Gata Defenders. I watch Chaotic instead of Family Guy in my bed everytime it gets aired, just about.
It was just the way you said "Let's face it...", which seemed to indicate that it was something we all have to face, when many people don't feel they need to. It's a valid opinion, but it's not everyone's opinion.

[LoneToonman]

It was just the way you said "Let's face it...", which seemed to indicate that it was something we all have to face, when many people don't feel they need to. It's a valid opinion, but it's not everyone's opinion.

Yes. You're right. But technically you can say that about almost anyone's opinion, that it's not universal. That is where the difference between opinions and knowledge lies. I don't really believe all of my opinions to be common knowledge, if you're wondering. A lot of them are more along the lines of editorials and theories...if I had to compare my opinions to any type of writing.

[Shift]

Yes. You're right. But technically you can say that about almost anyone's opinion, that it's not universal. That is where the difference between opinions and knowledge lies. I don't really believe all of my opinions to be common knowledge, if you're wondering. A lot of them are more along the lines of editorials and theories...if I had to compare my opinions to any type of writing.
That's fine. I guess I'll just say that I, for one, won't face it. :D

[Antiyonder]

Don't get me wrong though (please). I never really got into their version of TMNT. I'm too big of a fan of the old version of that show.

You're entitled to your opinion of course, but I don't see why you need to choose one incarnation over the other. I mean I for one enjoy The Batman as much as I enjoy Batman The Animated Series, just as I enjoy both Superfriends and JLU.

[Master Moron]

I still like some of the stuff they do with that franchise. But let's face it, ever since 4Kids got a hold of it, it just ain't what it used to be, especially in terms of sound quality and profits...4Kids needs to realize how bad it is when it comes to the way they make their shows and anime sound. Somebody get 4Kids a better casting director (that's what you call the lady or guy who picks out the voice actors, isn't it), for god sake! That and much of their actual designs. The best looking new 4Kids show the "revisioning" of Chaotic, has character designs that look beautiful. The rest of their "Western style shows." Not really doing it for me. I watch those when nothing else is on. To me a lot of what 4Kids does lacks universal aesthetic appeal. I suspect that's part of why they're not as popular with the fans as certain other studios are.

I agree with the voice acting. Some of the voices used on Ninja Turtles are really annoying, as is true in all of 4K!ds shows. I also tend to find the dialogue grating at times and the music incredibly lackluster. But, I don't really see a problem with the designs. I like the dark look of the series and I especially like the way the turtles and Shredder look.


Again you are arguing sentimental nostalgia and personal preferences as opposed to quality, will fans always want to see familiar characters and plots, of course they would, I will not argue against that, but does that mean they will be closed minded and will automatically reject anything that is new? You need to give fans more credit then that.

I wouldn't really go that far. I just don't see the point in creating new plots when there's so many unused plots that remain untapped.


Also, lets remove the notion that TMNT didn't use any familiar villains, since the movie did feature Karai and the Foot Clan as antagonists. And as to the fans reaction to the movie, Mirage comic book fans seemed to enjoy TMNT far more then Old Toon fans, since it was darker then the previous movies and kept much the elements of the old cartoon out, exact reason many of the Old Toon fans disliked the movie.

I guess you have a point, in the sense that the main problem wasn't that they didn't use villains from the comics, but rather, that they didn't use them well. If they had made Karai the main villain of the movie and gotten rid of Max Winters entirely you'd probably have a much better movie. I guess it would be just as bad to simply have Rat King and Baxter Stockman as throwaway villains who served no purpose.


Don't get me wrong though (please). I never really got into their version of TMNT. I'm too big of a fan of the old version of that show. I just love it TOO much. But please don't take what I say the wrong way. Some of what 4Kids do is very good, as manifested in places like the TZ forums and whatnot. And they have an insatiable fanbase. They have that going for them. I absolutely love Chaotic and Di Gata Defenders. I watch Chaotic instead of Family Guy in my bed everytime it gets aired, just about.

I never understand this line of reasoning even though I've heard lots of people use it. If you loved an old show, why wouldn't you want to see a new version of it? Part of the reason I like watching the new Ninja Turtles cartoon is because I loved the old show as a kid and watching the new show brings back feelings of nostalgia. I mean, following your logic, does it even matter what they do with the franchise? Won't you just love the old show too much to watch a new movie?

[Ian]

I'm not sure how people can claim that there aren't enough villains in the Ninja Turtles franchise. If you include all the comics, movies, cartoons, video games, and toys, there must be over a hundred villains.

Sure, if you include all of them. However, limit yourself to characters a) recognizable enough for their appearance to become a draw, who were b) created in the “right” continuity (Mirage, the current cartoon, and, to a much lesser extent, the Archie comics) and who can c) carry a movie without creating too large of a genre shift (see below), and the list becomes much, much smaller—no more than a handful of characters.


The Shredder
Karai
Baxter Stockman
The Rat King
Savanti Romero
Triceratons
Agent Bishop
Hun
My personal opinions on them all: The Shredder and Karai have already been used. Baxter Stockman could work and would benefit from a fresh take, but may turn off fans of the old cartoon expecting him to be a) white and b) a fly. The Rat King could also benefit from a definitive take, but might be too weird for the kids. Savanti Romero and the Triceratons could both carry a movie (the latter more than the former), but the sudden shift in tone could lead to genre whiplash (again, the Triceratons less so than Romero). Bishop may come off as too rip-off-y to anyone not familiar with the ‘toon—and perhaps even then. Hun would need some work; it took some time for him to really shine in the cartoon, time which is not really available in a movie.

One thing I’d like to note on the original characters vs. characters taken from other sources debate: let’s not forget that there has been at least one case where characters created for the movie have managed to join the TMNT collective consciousness: Tokka and Rahzar. They may have started as way-too obvious stand-ins for Bebop and Rocksteady, but they did become recognizable enough to make appearances in the cartoon and videogames after that, and I don’t believe the fact that they’re “original” characters was ever really held against them (then again, there wasn’t an internet back then).

On more general terms, part of the problem with the turtles franchise is that the franchise as a whole is still perceived as comedy with action trappings, instead of the opposite. Play the turtles straight, as the latest movie more-or-less did, and you get reviews like The New York Times’ (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01E3DD1530F930A15750C0A9619C8B63&scp=3&sq=TMNT&st=cse). Whether or not a future film uses established or original characters, this is a problem it will have to face.

Now, while this is not an insurmountable obstacle—the latest movie incarnation of Batman now stands pretty much side-by-side with the old TV series in the collective consciousness, if not completely replaced it—it would require a pretty damn good movie, and probably, a celestial alignment to bring it about. After all, if TMNT—by far the movie that takes itself most seriously—failed, why would producers expect an even more serious movie to succeed? At this point, the only way I see something like a “City at War”-themed movie to be green-lighted is if another of the nostalgia revival movies does well. Frankly, I think the future of the franchise rests just as much on the success of something like the G.I. Joe movie—who faces the same audience dissonance issue the turtles do—than anything Laird & Co. do.

[DarthGonzo]

Sure, if you include all of them. However, limit yourself to characters a) recognizable enough for their appearance to become a draw, who were b) created in the “right” continuity (Mirage, the current cartoon, and, to a much lesser extent, the Archie comics) and who can c) carry a movie without creating too large of a genre shift (see below), and the list becomes much, much smaller—no more than a handful of characters.

The Shredder
Karai
Baxter Stockman
The Rat King
Savanti Romero
Triceratons
Agent Bishop
Hun
My personal opinions on them all: The Shredder and Karai have already been used. Baxter Stockman could work and would benefit from a fresh take, but may turn off fans of the old cartoon expecting him to be a) white and b) a fly. The Rat King could also benefit from a definitive take, but might be too weird for the kids. Savanti Romero and the Triceratons could both carry a movie (the latter more than the former), but the sudden shift in tone could lead to genre whiplash (again, the Triceratons less so than Romero). Bishop may come off as too rip-off-y to anyone not familiar with the ‘toon—and perhaps even then. Hun would need some work; it took some time for him to really shine in the cartoon, time which is not really available in a movie.


What about Leatherhead?

I don't see why he couldn't work.

[Ian]

Leatherhead isn't a villain, outside of the original cartoon and the early Archie comics. In the original comics and current cartoon--which is where a future TMNT movie would likely draw most of its inspiration from--he is firmly established as an ally of the turtles.

[LoneToonman]

I agree with the voice acting. Some of the voices used on Ninja Turtles are really annoying, as is true in all of 4K!ds shows. I also tend to find the dialogue grating at times and the music incredibly lackluster. But, I don't really see a problem with the designs. I like the dark look of the series and I especially like the way the turtles and Shredder look.


I never understand this line of reasoning even though I've heard lots of people use it. If you loved an old show, why wouldn't you want to see a new version of it? Part of the reason I like watching the new Ninja Turtles cartoon is because I loved the old show as a kid and watching the new show brings back feelings of nostalgia. I mean, following your logic, does it even matter what they do with the franchise? Won't you just love the old show too much to watch a new movie?

Nah, I make exceptions for anything that's redone that I like, but if it's a remake of something old I like, and the new version doesn't appeal to me, why waste my time on something I'm not digging. I mean, at least 4Kids anime and co-pros have SOME good theme songs. I like Yu Gi Oh GX's theme song and Winx's theme songs, believe it or not (hard to believe, I know) and yet I do...

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneToonman http://forums.toonzone.net/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?p=2974390#post2974390)
Don't get me wrong though (please). I never really got into their version of TMNT. I'm too big of a fan of the old version of that show.

You're entitled to your opinion of course, but I don't see why you need to choose one incarnation over the other. I mean I for one enjoy The Batman as much as I enjoy Batman The Animated Series, just as I enjoy both Superfriends and JLU.

I like the shows you mentioned. I just don't like every adaptation out there. Nowadays if I don't like something, I don't bother watching it, even if I do like the concept behind the property it's based on. But I just don't have enough hours in the day to keep track of EVERYTHING (both good and bad) out there. There's just so many cartoons on 5+ animation/anime related channels nationwide now. Stores crammed with stuff I'd love to check out, but am not rich so right now I can't afford it, and so much stuff airing on the overnights, and early mornings, times I'd like to be awake, but am not...My life style makes it very tough to stay up all night and well into the morning keeping track of every last thing on air. But I definite try. Nowadays I just can't keep up with all the projects going on out there individually. Other people seem to do that easily in some ways. It's almost like they're walking encyclopedias or at the very least they access Wikipedia and Anime News Network a lot.. But not I. If there's a remake of a show I don't like, if it's unappealing to me, I don't have the time for it. I generally stick with my all time favorites and the new stuff that really catches my eye. Honestly, I don't have as much free time as certain other posters here...I'm kind of a busy guy...

[Toon Out]

I wouldn't really go that far. I just don't see the point in creating new plots when there's so many unused plots that remain untapped.


I understand where you're coming from, the best answer I can give you as to why they decided to come up with a new story as opposed to going with an existing story is that, Peter Laird wanted to do something new, and from a creators' perspective it's hard to fault him for wanting to do something new. Also keep in mind the film was rated PG (as contracted by the studio), any Mirage storyline would have been seriously scaled back, which wouldn't have made Mirage fans happy, best to probably come up with something new.

Putting all this aside, there's some new info coming from Kevin Eastman about the upcoming TMNT sequel:


"Yes, it is true. Although the CGI film did well enough to warrent a sequel, there has been much talk between Imagi and Warners to do a better "re-invention" (newest Hollywood buzzword) of the TMNT's, in a live action film--like what was done with Batman. Back to basics, back to the origin and the intro of the Shredder, etc...there have been talks, trips to Northampton to talk to Mr Laird, and discussions with the original "first" TMNT film director Steve Barron to come back and do it right--but no official word yet...will keep you posted. Best, Kevin"





I guess you have a point, in the sense that the main problem wasn't that they didn't use villains from the comics, but rather, that they didn't use them well. If they had made Karai the main villain of the movie and gotten rid of Max Winters entirely you'd probably have a much better movie. I guess it would be just as bad to simply have Rat King and Baxter Stockman as throwaway villains who served no purpose.
I agree that Karai should have gotten more character development, especially with the Shredder out of the picture, she is a character who I believe has a lot of untapped potential.



One thing I’d like to note on the original characters vs. characters taken from other sources debate: let’s not forget that there has been at least one case where characters created for the movie have managed to join the TMNT collective consciousness: Tokka and Rahzar. They may have started as way-too obvious stand-ins for Bebop and Rocksteady, but they did become recognizable enough to make appearances in the cartoon and videogames after that, and I don’t believe the fact that they’re “original” characters was ever really held against them (then again, there wasn’t an internet back then).


It should be interesting to note that Hun will be crossing over into the Mirage comics.

http://tristanhuwjones.blogspot.com/2008/08/guess-whos-comin-to-town.html



At this point, the only way I see something like a “City at War”-themed movie to be green-lighted is if another of the nostalgia revival movies does well.


Transformers.

[Master Moron]

Leatherhead isn't a villain, outside of the original cartoon and the early Archie comics. In the original comics and current cartoon--which is where a future TMNT movie would likely draw most of its inspiration from--he is firmly established as an ally of the turtles.

In the new cartoon he starts off as a villain until he realizes he's being used by Baxter Stockman. A similar approach could be used in a movie.


I understand where you're coming from, the best answer I can give you as to why they decided to come up with a new story as opposed to going with an existing story is that, Peter Laird wanted to do something new, and from a creators' perspective it's hard to fault him for wanting to do something new. Also keep in mind the film was rated PG (as contracted by the studio), any Mirage storyline would have been seriously scaled back, which wouldn't have made Mirage fans happy, best to probably come up with something new.

With all respect to Mr. Laird, just because he's sick of all the stories he's written, it doesn't mean everyone else is. It actually seems a bit arrogant of him. It's as if he expects everyone else to be as familiar with his work as he is.


Putting all this aside, there's some new info coming from Kevin Eastman about the upcoming TMNT sequel:


"Yes, it is true. Although the CGI film did well enough to warrent a sequel, there has been much talk between Imagi and Warners to do a better "re-invention" (newest Hollywood buzzword) of the TMNT's, in a live action film--like what was done with Batman. Back to basics, back to the origin and the intro of the Shredder, etc...there have been talks, trips to Northampton to talk to Mr Laird, and discussions with the original "first" TMNT film director Steve Barron to come back and do it right--but no official word yet...will keep you posted. Best, Kevin"


That sounds good. Actually, I think that's what they should have done from the beginning. Making sequels to movies that are more than ten years old tends to be a rather stupid idea. Most of the kids who are fans of the new show probably haven't seen the old movies, so a reboot makes sense. Though, shouldn't a reboot start with Baxter Stockman, rather than Shredder?

I also find it a little strange that he claimss that they want to do the next movie like Batman Begins, when TMNT was described as being similar to Batman Begins before it came out.

[Toon Out]

With all respect to Mr. Laird, just because he's sick of all the stories he's written, it doesn't mean everyone else is. It actually seems a bit arrogant of him. It's as if he expects everyone else to be as familiar with his work as he is.


In his defense, Laird acted no different then many creators do when given the opportunity to take their property outside their comics, some want the movies to be exactly like they are portrayed in their comics, others want them to be completely different (especially if the movie version will not be able to match the source material exactly).



so a reboot makes sense. Though, shouldn't a reboot start with Baxter Stockman, rather than Shredder?
If you are going to roboot the movies with the origin from the comics, then you would use Shredder, whom the turtles fought and killed in issue #1.



I also find it a little strange that he claimss that they want to do the next movie like Batman Begins, when TMNT was described as being similar to Batman Begins before it came out.I think he is referring to the way Warner Bros completely restarted the franchise and made it darker and more adult oriented then the previous films.