Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem

[TheVileOne]

Playmates only holds the toy license (since the 80's, even predating the cartoon). They have no ownership or control over the IP.

Up until 2009, TMNT was a creator owned franchise. Eastman and Laird owned and ran it, through their Mirage Studios. Eventually, Eastman sold his half to Laird in 2000 and Laird sold the whole thing to Viacom in '09.

Unfortunately, it's the worst thing that could have happened to this property.

I disagree that it's the worst thing. The 2012 animated series was a good show and Ciro Nielli did right by these characters.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

I disagree that it's the worst thing. The 2012 animated series was a good show and Ciro Nielli did right by these characters.

The Nick cartoon was great but so was the previous 4Kids show (co-produced by Mirage).

The film franchise IMO was much more important in getting it right. That's what the general audience associates first and foremost with the franchise. A good, respectable film could have really gone a long way but they completely ****ed it up. It's like with Batman back in 1989. They absolutely needed to nail that film to make Batman respectable again to the general audience. Same with his reboot in 2005.

Again, I absolutely love the Nick show but I would have easily traded it for a great TMNT film (something on par with Marvel Studios' best efforts).

Even on the animation side, they're also starting to drop the ball. The new cartoon looks pretty bad. It seems like the previous series was a fluke.

 

[Aximili86]

Really think they need to just get back to basics with the turtles. Go small-scale, use the '90 movie as a general template and tone.

Shredder, Foot Clan, April, probably don't need Casey to begin with. Maybe go a little more oldschool with the personalities for something different this time, have Mikey as the sort of sweet/sensitive arty little-brother type like in the books, rather than the King Of The *****es surfer-dude trope.

It'd never happen in this day and age, but what I wouldn't give for practical effects/turtles here, too. Go all Where The Wild Things Are with it: physical costumes, and layer the facial expressions over digitally in post. Yeah, you're not going to get the guys doing triple-flips and all kinds of crazy **** if you do it that way, but honestly that stuff's half the problem in the disposable recent/reboot movies. It's just flash for the sake of flash. Just hire real martial artists to be in the suits (with the voices added in later with actual actors), and find a way to streamline the costumes a little so they can move at least a little better. More agile than the '90 movie, but you don't need that weightless CG flippity-floppity **** again.

Tonally this should be a little darker, too. Not Eastman/Laird comics dark, but walk that perfect line the original film did, halfway between the comics and the 80s toon.

 

[Loden Greatstorm]

That would be amazing.

 

[Inhuman117]

The Turtles and the Villains like Shredder should get back to Practical like in the 90's and not CGI and get rid from the Transformers like action

 

[terry78]

They're not going back to costumes, they want them to be able to do ninja like feats and they're pretty restricting. Theyll maintain the CG but maybe not make it so busy.

 

[Aximili86]

CG feels like CG no matter how good it is. Totally in agreement they're not going to do costumes here, but they would if they were smart.

Think of it like the "Keaton couldn't move his head, we'll approach the suit differently and try to figure out a way to make Bale be able to do that", just on a larger scale. Get creative, get the right people on it, and you can figure it out - not as acrobatic as the recent computer movies, but more acrobatic than the original film. Slightly skinnier costumes, wirework, get a braintrust together and figure it out. You know, like directors were doing for 70-odd years before the computers hit.

And for long-shots, in shadow, that kind of thing you can do with CG anyway and show the acrobatic stuff. But basically, they got away with quite a lot in the '90 movie in terms of what they could do - you could likely find a nice balance now in 2018 with the suits. Have weight, keep the "actual physical object in-camera" thing, and still be able to pull off some good fights. There's a middle ground.

But, of coure, they'll hire a 30 year old director and do it all with greenscreen & tennis balls. No argument there, they totally will.

 

[DarkKnight88]

CG feels like CG no matter how good it is.

Nope. Watch the new Planet of the Apes trilogy. That's the right way.

 

[2kt09]

The Nick cartoon was great but so was the previous 4Kids show (co-produced by Mirage).

The film franchise IMO was much more important in getting it right. That's what the general audience associates first and foremost with the franchise. A good, respectable film could have really gone a long way but they completely ****ed it up. It's like with Batman back in 1989. They absolutely needed to nail that film to make Batman respectable again to the general audience. Same with his reboot in 2005.

Again, I absolutely love the Nick show but I would have easily traded it for a great TMNT film (something on par with Marvel Studios' best efforts).

Even on the animation side, they're also starting to drop the ball. The new cartoon looks pretty bad. It seems like the previous series was a fluke.

The writing on these movies is on par with an average ep from these shows.
The problem TMNT will never not be able to shake off is they're always a pastiche; never the trendsetter.
That's important because folks keep talking as if the latter is what they desperately need out of TMNT.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

The writing on these movies is on par with an average ep from these shows.
The problem TMNT will never not be able to shake off is they're always a pastiche; never the trendsetter.
That's important because folks keep talking as if the latter is what they desperately need out of TMNT.

The shows we're at least made by people who love the Turtles. They we're genuinely passionate about the property. The new movies are dog ****. They're cynical cash grabs.

They're giving this reboot to the exact same people that drove the franchise into the ground two years ago. I want to be excited but it's hard when it seems like they haven't learned anything.

 

[2kt09]

The shows were at least made by people who love the Turtles. They were genuinely passionate about the property. The new movies are dog ****. They're cynical cash grabs.

They're giving this reboot to the exact same people that drove the franchise into the ground two years ago. I want to be excited but it's hard when it seems like they haven't learned anything.

There's no well-received TMNT movie.
Each & every movie shows an understanding of what TMNT is.

Where these same people really went wrong was thinking they can appease the 80s crowd and gain more of an audience in the sequel.

What they could do to spice things up, is another fully animated reboot.
Spider-Man and Batman are finally doing it.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

There's no well-received TMNT movie.
Each & every movie shows an understanding of what TMNT is.

Where these same people really went wrong was thinking they can appease the 80s crowd and gain more of an audience in the sequel.

What they could do to spice things up, is another fully animated reboot.
Spider-Man and Batman are finally doing it.

I disagree about the Bay films understanding what TMNT is.

One huge mistake those films made was removing the Yoshi/Saki backstory. That's the core of the Turtles mythology. It's like making a Batman movie but removing the death of Bruce's parents or making Superman but completely removing Krypton from his story.

That's just one of the many problems those films had.

Also, the original film was well received. I saw it in theaters when I was a kid. This was during the height of the Turtles popularity. Trust me, it was an extremely popular movie at the time and everyone loved it.

It's still a great film (top ten CBM for me) and holds up today. Just my opinion though. The sequels we're terrible though. That's another story.

 

[TheVileOne]

The Nick cartoon was great but so was the previous 4Kids show (co-produced by Mirage).

The film franchise IMO was much more important in getting it right. That's what the general audience associates first and foremost with the franchise. A good, respectable film could have really gone a long way but they completely ****ed it up. It's like with Batman back in 1989. They absolutely needed to nail that film to make Batman respectable again to the general audience. Same with his reboot in 2005.

Again, I absolutely love the Nick show but I would have easily traded it for a great TMNT film (something on par with Marvel Studios' best efforts).

Even on the animation side, they're also starting to drop the ball. The new cartoon looks pretty bad. It seems like the previous series was a fluke.

Still wasn't the worst thing. I'd say that late 1990s live-action TV show was worse.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Still wasn't the worst thing. I'd say that late 1990s live-action TV show was worse.

We'll I'd argue the Bay films are worse and they did more damage to the brand than a niche children's show from the 90's, that no one remembers, but we're arguing semantics here!

 

[TheVileOne]

You can't tell me the Viacom purchase was one of the worst things to ever happen to the franchise when it produced one of the best animated shows to ever come out of the franchise.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

You can't tell me the Viacom purchase was one of the worst things to ever happen to the franchise when it produced one of the best animated shows to ever come out of the franchise.

I am telling you that!

The Viacom purchase, gave us the Bay films and an upcoming reboot that will also be produced by Bay.

No animated series is worth that!

 

[TheVileOne]

I am telling you that!

The Viacom purchase, gave us the Bay films and an upcoming reboot that will also be produced by Bay.

No animated series is worth that!

Considering it's one of the best TMNT adaptations ever...I disagree. I like it more than the 2003 series.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Considering it's one of the best TMNT adaptations ever...I disagree. I like it more than the 2003 series.

Still not worth it. Viacom sucks.

 

[marty mcfly]

It'd never happen in this day and age, but what I wouldn't give for practical effects/turtles here, too. Go all Where The Wild Things Are with it: physical costumes, and layer the facial expressions over digitally in post. Yeah, you're not going to get the guys doing triple-flips and all kinds of crazy **** if you do it that way, but honestly that stuff's half the problem in the disposable recent/reboot movies. It's just flash for the sake of flash. Just hire real martial artists to be in the suits (with the voices added in later with actual actors), and find a way to streamline the costumes a little so they can move at least a little better. More agile than the '90 movie, but you don't need that weightless CG flippity-floppity **** again.

I've been saying this since the reboot monstrosities were revealed. Use guys in suits and just use CGI to enhance them. That's basically what they did with Black Panther and Spider-Man in the recent movies. CGI their eyes/mouths and any kind of ninja moves that maybe aren't super impressive practically. It would look and feel so much better!!!

 

[2kt09]

I disagree about the Bay films understanding what TMNT is.

One huge mistake those films made was removing the Yoshi/Saki backstory. That's the core of the Turtles mythology. It's like making a Batman movie but removing the death of Bruce's parents or making Superman but completely removing Krypton from his story.

That's just one of the many problems those films had.

The Turtles mythology is the mutation and an overgrown talking rat teaching young overgrown talking turtles martial arts who also happened to be named after Renaissance artists. The Yoshi/Saki backstory is for Splinter's mythology.
The rivalry with the Foot should have been over Sacks in this vers rather than contriving Saki, who could just as easily show up in a later movie under the explanation of a foreign or main branch.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

The Turtles mythology is the mutation and an overgrown talking rat teaching young overgrown talking turtles martial arts who also happened to be named after Renaissance artists. The Yoshi/Saki backstory is for Splinter's mythology.
The rivalry with the Foot should have been over Sacks in this vers rather than contriving Saki, who could just as easily show up in a later movie under the explanation of a foreign or main branch.

Splinter's mythology is the Turtles mythology. Without Splinter, there are no Turtles. Removing such a core aspect from the story, showed how little they understood the property.

They removed Saki and tried to whitewash the Shredder, just so Bay could cast his buddy in the role. Can you honestly defend that as doing what's best for the property?

They only reason they went back and changed it was because of the backlash. Just like when Bay had the bright idea of making the Turtles, aliens. Remember that one? I read that script. It was so ****ing atrocious. Again, they only changed it because the internet threw a huge **** fit.

Trust me. These guys don't get it.

 

[Astro13Zombie]

I’m hyped about this.

Can’t wait to see how it turns out.

 

[2kt09]

Splinter's mythology is the Turtles mythology. Without Splinter, there are no Turtles. Removing such a core aspect from the story, showed how little they understood the property.

They removed Saki and tried to whitewash the Shredder, just so Bay could cast his buddy in the role. Can you honestly defend that as doing what's best for the property?

They only reason they went back and changed it was because of the backlash. Just like when Bay had the bright idea of making the Turtles, aliens. Remember that one? I read that script. It was so ****ing atrocious. Again, they only changed it because the internet threw a huge **** fit.

Trust me. These guys don't get it.

Laird probably doesn't get it either then, since he okay'd the fusion of a robot Shredder and an Utrom, "Krang", in another take, and that was the main villain. It's because of such constant shifts and changes that TMNT has lasted as long as it did. The Bay TMNT isn't that drastic. Haven't gotten around to the previous script. Is it still online?

The Yoshi/Saki backstory, whichever vers, is only a core aspect if you're willing to do something interesting with it.
Sacks was thrown in to still have that revenge angle.
This supposed history sounds refreshing. Now if only they spent more runtime on it rather than squeezing in a Saki cameo.

 

[Astro13Zombie]

I won’t mind the turtles being cgi if it’s good cgi.
A mix of practical and cgi is the best way to go imo but I’m not getting my hopes up.

Definitely want them to be smaller and have less....accessories.
No bulletproof

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Laird probably doesn't get it either then, since he okay'd the fusion of a robot Shredder and an Utrom, "Krang", in another take, and that was the main villain. It's because of such constant shifts and changes that TMNT has lasted as long as it did. The Bay TMNT isn't that drastic. Haven't gotten around to the previous script. Is it still online?

The Yoshi/Saki backstory, whichever vers, is only a core aspect if you're willing to do something interesting with it.
Sacks was thrown in to still have that revenge angle.
This supposed history sounds refreshing. Now if only they spent more runtime on it rather than squeezing in a Saki cameo.

But even with such a drastic change as Utrom Shredder, the Yoshi/Saki story was still a core apsect of the show (Same with all the cartoons and the older films). They added the twist because, like you said, they were trying to do something interesting with it.

Sachs was only added in so Fichtner could be cast. How does whitewashing Shredder improve anything?

Either way these movies were failures. Two years later and their rebooting again.