PDA

View Full Version : If Nickelodeon never bought TMNT


Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-30-2017, 08:30 AM
When Nickelodeon bought the TMNT-franchise in October 2009, the 2003–2009 animated TV-series was over, and Turtles Forever had aired.

But what would we have if they never did? Would we now have two films, IDW comics and the 2012 cartoon? Something else, or nothing new at all?

Jephael
01-30-2017, 08:42 AM
I for one am glad with what the buyout has given us, especially the return of not just Kevin Eastman's presence in the franchise but wonderful talents like Rob Paulsen. I'm sure it was a tough decision for Peter Laird to make, and I'm willing to bet he spent many countless nights debating whether or not it would be a good idea. I wish people would just get over the fact that Mirage no longer holds the rights to TMNT.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-30-2017, 09:28 AM
I for one am glad with what the buyout has given us, especially the return of not just Kevin Eastman's presence in the franchise but wonderful talents like Rob Paulsen. I'm sure it was a tough decision for Peter Laird to make, and I'm willing to bet he spent many countless nights debating whether or not it would be a good idea. I wish people would just get over the fact that Mirage no longer holds the rights to TMNT.

But do you think we would have anything new post-2009 if that never happened?

Wesley
01-30-2017, 10:00 AM
I'd say we wouldn't have got anything new if Nickelodeon never bought TMNT. Peter Laird had grown tired of it and wanted to move on.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-30-2017, 10:08 AM
I'd say we wouldn't have got anything new if Nickelodeon never bought TMNT. Peter Laird had grown tired of it and wanted to move on.

Not even two films?

Wesley
01-30-2017, 11:02 AM
Not even two films?

Maybe one or two films and the IDW comics, but I think a new cartoon would not have been made.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-30-2017, 11:03 AM
Maybe one or two films and the IDW comics, but I think a new cartoon would not have been made.

There would probably not be possible to put all characters the producers want into the same version (except for maybe Krang, Vernon, Bebop and Rocksteady appearing in the films).

neatoman
01-30-2017, 11:15 AM
I don't know... Maybe Peter would have ended up licensing TMNT for another cartoon? It seems like the most likely scenario, only he probably wouldn't be as involved that time around as he was with the 2003 series, only vetoing a few things.

What I have in mind is something like this, imagine that he licensed TMNT to Nickelodeon for a cartoon and they ended up putting the same people to work. You'd basically end up with the same show, only without Bebop, Rocksteady, Slash etc.

Roseangelo
01-30-2017, 11:24 AM
The franchise was dead in the water when Nickelodeon bought it.

CyberCubed
01-30-2017, 11:29 AM
The TMNT franchise as a whole would be like the current state of Mirage comics from PL....non-existent.

IDW would have never gotten the license if not for Nick, so we would have no new comics now either.

plastroncafe
01-30-2017, 11:32 AM
I think we'd have maybe gotten another series of trade paperback reprints of the Mirage books.

They were selling book 1 in Artist's Alley.
But short of that....who knows.

Sabacooza
01-30-2017, 11:44 AM
If Nickelodeon wouldn't have bought TMNT, I would've been so happy. However, we wouldn't have gotten the IDW comics and I do love those. We probably would've gotten a better live action movie as well.

CyberCubed
01-30-2017, 11:54 AM
If Nickelodeon wouldn't have bought TMNT, I would've been so happy. However, we wouldn't have gotten the IDW comics and I do love those. We probably would've gotten a better live action movie as well.

No we wouldn't have. The movie deal was dead in the water before Nick picked it up.

And why would you have been so happy if Nick didn't get the license? The cartoon was a huge hit, and you don't have to watch it if you don't want to.

plastroncafe
01-30-2017, 12:12 PM
While I doubt this is the case, I'm curious how things would be now if someone other than Nick had picked up the license.

Disney?
Warner Brothers?
Someone else....

neatoman
01-30-2017, 12:22 PM
While I doubt this is the case, I'm curious how things would be now if someone other than Nick had picked up the license.

Disney?
Warner Brothers?
Someone else....

Well if Disney or Warner Brothers got to TMNT, then TMNT comics would probably be a neglected aspect of Marvel or DC. Fox or Universal, maybe even Sony?

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-30-2017, 12:37 PM
I think we'd have maybe gotten another series of trade paperback reprints of the Mirage books.

And maybe some Archie...

Thanks for reminding me even more how boring it was to be a TMNT fan back in 2009.

CyberCubed
01-30-2017, 12:52 PM
While I doubt this is the case, I'm curious how things would be now if someone other than Nick had picked up the license.

Disney?
Warner Brothers?
Someone else....

WB and Disney both could have bought the license, Nick offered them the highest money and were interested. I'm sure Mirage would have sold to Disney if they were interested back in 2009 and/or offered more than the $60 million Nick did for the franchise.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-30-2017, 12:54 PM
Disney would probably give the TMNT franchise more publicity, but I don't think it's worth that.

sdp
01-30-2017, 01:18 PM
What Rose said is only partially true, the franchise was indeed dead but only during that moment, the first movie had failed and the 2k3 show had been cancelled after multiple seasons and there was no plan for anything new and Laird had been tired of the franchise for a while now at that time. But like it did in the past it would've had some off time and returned. Look at the franchise now and it's also "dead", no more movies after they bombed, the 2012 Nick show is coming to an end and IDW isn't doing gangbusters either so who knows how long it'll last. The problem with Viacom owning the turtles is for them they already profited from the franchise and it could easily be thrown in their bolt and seen as a product that doesn't make money anymore outside of licensing for nostalgic nerds. Viacom has tons of franchises that have been huge and would've gotten revivals by any other company and yet they don't, I don't really know why; Only recently are we seeing them revive old Nickelodeon stuff but even then it seems to be aimed at nostalgic adults who grew up with those IPs instead of re-imagining them for new generations.

But anywho let's take a look at what would've happened in the short term if Viacom hadn't bought TMNT:

The Mirage comics would've continued in their once every so long I believe Laird would've been more inclined to finish something even if not the story and only releasing one new issue every 2 years and Tales would've continued along with reprints. So yeah no IDW there.

Would we have seen a new TMNT show as fast as Nick's did? Probably not but another animated show would've happened eventually and I'm sure by 2017 we'd be enjoying it (or hating it). Who knows where the show would've appeared, maybe even Nickelodeon and who knows if Laird would've finally allowed Mutants and other OT elements in it like the Nick 2012 show did. That's still up in the air, I think after his baby 2k3 finished, his lack of enthusiasm of TMNT stuff and all the pressure to have OT content he would've caved and allowed it.

We already had a movie on the way and it would've released and while Andrew would've still hated it you can bet it would've been nothing like the goofy movie we got from Platinum Dunes and hate. Who knows if it would've been a success but we would've at least had that movie to look forward to that Laird described as "closer to the comics"

The nostalgic merchandising would've continued pretty much as it did as we'd already seen a lot of that stuff before the sale. It's true that once Viacom owned TMNT this type of merchandise was seen everywhere and Mirage wouldn't have done that but it was inevitable since there was demand there. We'd already seen Laird being ok with that type of OT merchandise. It's more likely that we wouldn've seen season sets for 2k3 as 4Kids started licensing their stuff for cheaper DVD sets, that dream is now dead as the format is dead. Video Games? Well we haven't gotten any good ones and I don't think we would've either, maybe some cheap licensed apps.

TMNT is too big and what's considered in business as an evergreen company that will always make money so of course it would've continued without the sale and as reluctant as Laird was to try different things I do think it was better having a man and small company in charge of TMNT than a multi-billion dollar one. Without Viacom we wouldn't have gotten this current wave of TMNT so soon but it went away as quick as it came and even if it wasn't terrible it really could've been so much better that what we got with the new movie and show, which I don't hate and like them but they are far from my favorite incarnations as well. Let's hope for the best.

CyberCubed
01-30-2017, 01:27 PM
Sdp time to go over a few things.

But like it did in the past it would've had some off time and returned.

The problem is Mirage would have to take the interest with another party to revive it back in 2009, otherwise they would have sat on the property and let it stay dormant. TMNT isn't like WB, Disney, etc. franchises where they can get revived by company execs out of nowhere...TMNT was basically a niche indie franchise owned by a minor company.

Look at the franchise now and it's also "dead", no more movies after they bombed, the 2012 Nick show is coming to an end and IDW isn't doing gangbusters either so who knows how long it'll last.

IDW TMNT is literally their best selling book at the moment. It's going to get at least a 10 year run (we're in year 5 now) and 100 issues (we're up to issue #66 now). IDW TMNT will continue long after the cartoon ends.


The Mirage comics would've continued in their once every so long I believe Laird would've been more inclined to finish something even if not the story and only releasing one new issue every 2 years and Tales would've continued along with reprints. So yeah no IDW there.

Mirage had no interest in doing more reprints. They only put out two collections for the 25th anniversary and stopped there. They never intended to continue reprinting old books. Also Volume 4 would stay dead as it is right now, PL just doesn't care to continue it. Tales of the TMNT also ended in 2010 when Mirage still has rights to publish 12 comics a year even while IDW is going, they don't want to do it.

Would we have seen a new TMNT show as fast as Nick's did? Probably not but another animated show would've happened eventually and I'm sure by 2017 we'd be enjoying it (or hating it). Who knows where the show would've appeared, maybe even Nickelodeon and who knows if Laird would've finally allowed Mutants and other OT elements in it like the Nick 2012 show did. That's still up in the air, I think after his baby 2k3 finished, his lack of enthusiasm of TMNT stuff and all the pressure to have OT content he would've caved and allowed it.

Most likely we'd have no new TMNT cartoon for a decade. TMNT would be a dead franchise. We'd all be sitting here twiddling our thumbs.


The nostalgic merchandising would've continued pretty much as it did as we'd already seen a lot of that stuff before the sale. It's true that once Viacom owned TMNT this type of merchandise was seen everywhere and Mirage wouldn't have done that but it was inevitable since there was demand there. We'd already seen Laird being ok with that type of OT merchandise. It's more likely that we wouldn've seen season sets for 2k3 as 4Kids started licensing their stuff for cheaper DVD sets, that dream is now dead as the format is dead. Video Games? Well we haven't gotten any good ones and I don't think we would've either, maybe some cheap licensed apps.

Mirage wouldn't have continued the license for toys when they were done. The Playmates toyline was ending in 2010 for the most part. Had Nick not picked up the license we'd get nothing.

TMNT is too big and what's considered in business as an evergreen company that will always make money so of course it would've continued without the sale and as reluctant as Laird was to try different things I do think it was better having a man and small company in charge of TMNT than a multi-billion dollar one. .

NOW TMNT is an evergreen property, but there was no guarantee it would be one before. Remember when the original cartoon ended and nobody believed there would be a "new" TMNT cartoon after? When the 2k3 series was originally announced people were shocked. Nobody expected a new show.

And as said, the only reason the Nick cartoon started so quickly is because they got the licensed and wanted to make a new show as quick as possible. Otherwise TMNT would have had nothing new since 2009.

Seriously, it's like some of you have no idea what the "dead years" of TMNT were like circa around 1997-2001 besides the flop of Next Mutation. For those of us old enough to remember that era it would have happened again.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-30-2017, 02:28 PM
Video Games? Well we haven't gotten any good ones and I don't think we would've either, maybe some cheap licensed apps.

We at least got a Turtles in Time remake some months before the purchase.

sdp
01-30-2017, 03:38 PM
Sdp time to go over a few things.

The problem is Mirage would have to take the interest with another party to revive it back in 2009, otherwise they would have sat on the property and let it stay dormant. TMNT isn't like WB, Disney, etc. franchises where they can get revived by company execs out of nowhere...TMNT was basically a niche indie franchise owned by a minor company.

IDW TMNT is literally their best selling book at the moment. It's going to get at least a 10 year run (we're in year 5 now) and 100 issues (we're up to issue #66 now). IDW TMNT will continue long after the cartoon ends.

Mirage had no interest in doing more reprints. They only put out two collections for the 25th anniversary and stopped there. They never intended to continue reprinting old books. Also Volume 4 would stay dead as it is right now, PL just doesn't care to continue it. Tales of the TMNT also ended in 2010 when Mirage still has rights to publish 12 comics a year even while IDW is going, they don't want to do it.

Most likely we'd have no new TMNT cartoon for a decade. TMNT would be a dead franchise. We'd all be sitting here twiddling our thumbs.

Mirage wouldn't have continued the license for toys when they were done. The Playmates toyline was ending in 2010 for the most part. Had Nick not picked up the license we'd get nothing.

NOW TMNT is an evergreen property, but there was no guarantee it would be one before. Remember when the original cartoon ended and nobody believed there would be a "new" TMNT cartoon after? When the 2k3 series was originally announced people were shocked. Nobody expected a new show.

And as said, the only reason the Nick cartoon started so quickly is because they got the licensed and wanted to make a new show as quick as possible. Otherwise TMNT would have had nothing new since 2009.



Having a new animated show by 2017 is rampant speculation from my part but like I mentioned an evergreen property like TMNT wouldn't stay dead too long as long as a small company like Mirage had it since they'd find different companies interested. As far as the licensing we were already seeing a lot of nostalgia merchandise before the purchase so while Viacom kicked it up a notch (or blasted it) it was also the right time I think we'd continue to get those Keychains/plushies/mondo's/SHFiguarts even if the Playmates line didn't exist. TMNT reached that point where most of the fans of the OT are now in their late 20s/early 30s so it's the "merchandising tipping point" that say Transformers and other 80s properties had a few years prior. I think that is pretty much at its tail end now though.

As far as comics I don't really follow that industry too much so I'm only basing that on a few things I read here from time to time and how Mirage handled things but I'm no expert and IDW I remember about a year ago or so how the line was not selling as well but other than that I don't know.

I still have mixed feelings about Nick having the turtles, hopefully they don't shove it to the vault and we can see some stuff sooner rather than later.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-30-2017, 04:03 PM
I still have mixed feelings about Nick having the turtles, hopefully they don't shove it to the vault and we can see some stuff sooner rather than later.

Maybe we'll get a third film, but then by the late-2010's and early-2020's there'll probably be seom years of breaks again.

IndigoErth
01-30-2017, 04:34 PM
I'd hope if it hadn't been Nick then it would (surely?) still have been someone else sooner or later.

I hope that they would never get set aside forever. Esp not with the fact that the first generations that grew up with them now have people in the businesses capable of seeing to it that they continue to exist and care to give any thought to the level of public interest in the franchise.

Plus new fans that have been made via 2012 so you have a whole new crop of kids that will one day be nostalgic for it. Turtle Power is (hopefully) unstoppable...even if it takes a nap now and then.

I can't fault Peter Laird for wanting to move on after his/their lives being dominated by the Turtles for so many years. It's good of them that they even had the mind to, in a sense, let them leave the nest as a grown franchise and continue without them (save for Eastman playing helicopter parent a tiny bit via IDW lol). Grateful for that.



Were it ever at risk of being put aside for good, I wish the fan base could somehow take a collective ownership of them ("community ownership"?) and posses the ability to give license or rights to whatever companies it/we saw fit via vote.

TigerClaw
01-30-2017, 05:34 PM
TMNT would have been different if it was bought by Disney, They probably would've had Marvel do the comics, an animated series for Disney XD and live action movies that would have the Disney flair to them, in other words, they wouldn't be dark, but family friendly movies.

CyberCubed
01-30-2017, 05:38 PM
Most likely a Disney cartoon would have been terrible if Marvel's current animation of Ultimate Spiderman, Avengers, and Hulk is any indication.

TigerClaw
01-30-2017, 05:45 PM
I'm sure there's an parallel universe in which Disney owns TMNT.

Coola Yagami
01-30-2017, 06:09 PM
Either some other company would have bought it with a different show, movie and comic than we got, or Pete would have just let the turtles die. He was just that burnt out.

Roseangelo
01-30-2017, 06:25 PM
What Rose said is only partially true... snip

Everything you suppose is good in theory. But the problem at the time was that every new thing required Peter's personal approval, and he was pretty done with the whole thing at that point. Getting any new projects off the ground through him, short of anything being an exact adaptation of the original comics, would have been near impossible. And Mirage had completely forgotten how to be a viable comic book company. Everything Playmates might have had in the works got the hault (remember their first go at Mirage Turtles, which never got produced?). There was a movie supposedly in the works (one of the things Viacom inherited), but it was more wishful thinking than a reality.

CyberCubed
01-30-2017, 06:39 PM
I think a lot of people have simply forgotten over the years what the franchise was like with Mirage/Peter in control. Granted its literally been over 7 years since 2009 now, so a lot of people either weren't around back then or simply don't remember.

For those of us older fans who have been in the online fandom for 15-20 years, we still remember. Back then people would also complain how few Mirage trades of the comics there were, how little copies were produced and how they sold out so quickly, and how most stuff was so obscure.

PL would have done nothing other than sit on the TMNT franchise had the Nick deal never happened, and it would be just as dead as the Mirage comics are right now. We'd literally be sitting here twiddling our thumbs.

Sabacooza
01-30-2017, 07:00 PM
Nick will also most likely sit on it after it becomes non profitable so we only delayed the inevitable. I hope I'm wrong though.

Coola Yagami
01-30-2017, 07:07 PM
Nick will also most likely sit on it after it becomes non profitable so we only delayed the inevitable. I hope I'm wrong though.

Oh we can always count on a TMNT All Grown Up sequel or a crossover with Jimmy Neutron or whatever to pull then out of the vault every few years.

Kendamu
01-30-2017, 07:54 PM
I think some of the unfinished stuff from Tales might've gotten fleshed out a bit better.

I don't think that the movie they were going for would've ever gotten off the ground.

Any subsequent TV appearances would've been extremely limited like 2k3 and the 2k7 movie was.

I would've still enjoyed having my gritty little indie comic Turtles doing their thing in Tales every couple of months, but I'm very glad that things turned out the way they have.

CyberCubed
01-30-2017, 08:24 PM
I would've still enjoyed having my gritty little indie comic Turtles doing their thing in Tales every couple of months, but I'm very glad that things turned out the way they have.

Tales of the TMNT ended because Mirage/Pete didn't want to put out any more issues. It has nothing to do with the sale to Nick.

Mirage still has the rights to publish 12-18 comics a year and has had those rights since the sale. They could have had Mirage comics coming out alongside IDW over these last 5 years, but Peter simply doesn't care to do so.

DestronMirage22
01-30-2017, 09:34 PM
I think we'd be better off. A downside would be not having the IDW comics, but at least we wouldn't have to suffer Bayturtles, incompetent writing, or more Playmates crap.
I'm sure that nostalgia would've eventually hit the turtles some way, and we'd have a resurgence of TMNT differently than the one going on now; we would've probably seen more stuff geared towards Mirage, then FW, Archie, and so on.

Wildcat
01-30-2017, 10:06 PM
I feel like I mentioned this already and I'm sure it was discussed back then but I don't see why they sold the franchise at all. Could have just taken a break from it if it got overwhelming or tiring.

Anyway someone would have gotten a license to do another cartoon. Probably Nick. I'm just really curious what they want to do long term. Make more shows that are basically a retelling again? This goes for whoever had acquired it.

I would have preferred Disney...because they're Disney. Their movies would have been better and they definitely would have put TMNT in thier theme parks.

Roseangelo
01-30-2017, 11:26 PM
I feel like I mentioned this already and I'm sure it was discussed back then but I don't see why they sold the franchise at all. Could have just taken a break from it if it got overwhelming or tiring.

Anyway someone would have gotten a license to do another cartoon. Probably Nick. I'm just really curious what they want to do long term. Make more shows that are basically a retelling again? This goes for whoever had acquired it.

I would have preferred Disney...because they're Disney. Their movies would have been better and they definitely would have put TMNT in thier theme parks.

$150 million dollars is a pretty good reason to sell. Plus being able to essentially retire and not having to worry about business stuff anymore.

As for another series getting off the ground had Peter not sold, like I said a few posts back, it would have required Peter's oversight on everything and he only has one "creative" vision for the Turtles.

I doubt the franchise was even on Disney's radar. 2009 was the year they spent $4 billion on Marvel. Compare that to Nick paying $150 million for TMNT and TMNT simply isn't big enough for Disney to bother with.

Wildcat
01-31-2017, 12:24 AM
$150 million dollars is a pretty good reason to sell. Plus being able to essentially retire and not having to worry about business stuff anymore.

As for another series getting off the ground had Peter not sold, like I said a few posts back, it would have required Peter's oversight on everything and he only has one "creative" vision for the Turtles.

I doubt the franchise was even on Disney's radar. 2009 was the year they spent $4 billion on Marvel. Compare that to Nick paying $150 million for TMNT and TMNT simply isn't big enough for Disney to bother with.Well it's a lot of money but I'm assuming they were rich before anyway. It's fine but if I had created something this popular I would not sell it. That's just me.

What's Peter's one "creative" vision? I really don't follow them individually.

Ya at the time Disney wasn't gonna get it but why do you say it isn't big enough for them to bother with? I'm sure they'd do a great job with it.

CyberCubed
01-31-2017, 12:35 AM
What's Peter's one "creative" vision? I really don't follow them individually.

Basically for the franchise to stick close to Mirage as much as possible. Same reason you didn't see any original cartoon or Archie characters in the 2k3 series.

Ya at the time Disney wasn't gonna get it but why do you say it isn't big enough for them to bother with? I'm sure they'd do a great job with it.

Disney's current superhero cartoons are terrible and I doubt a comic by Marvel would do any good.

Powder
01-31-2017, 01:00 AM
As far as big companies go, I think TMNT landed in the right hands. Sure, the movies suck, but everything else is great. If they had gone elsewhere, we'd probably have a pretty good movie & crappy comics/cartoons. I'm good with 2/3.

Wildcat
01-31-2017, 01:21 AM
Well I really like Nick's cartoon I just would have preferred Disney for the other reasons I mentioned.

Only Disney superhero cartoon I saw was Ultimate Spider-Man. I saw most of it and the finale. I thought it was pretty good. Maybe using every other Marvel character was a bit much.

I think a Disney TMNT cartoon would have been good.

neatoman
01-31-2017, 05:44 AM
Well I really like Nick's cartoon I just would have preferred Disney for the other reasons I mentioned.

Only Disney superhero cartoon I saw was Ultimate Spider-Man. I saw most of it and the finale. I thought it was pretty good. Maybe using every other Marvel character was a bit much.

I think a Disney TMNT cartoon would have been good.

Ultimate Spider-Man pissed me off and I get the feeling most other Spider-Man fans were pissed off as well. Granted, season 4 was OK but it didn't ever fully redeem itself.

Avengers Assemble, Agents of SMASH, Guardians of the Galaxy and Ultimate Spider-Man all share similar problems, in that they're about the lamest thing they could have made but USM makes my blood boil the most, it takes everything about what makes Spider-Man a compelling concept and just gets it wrong. The show thinks Spider-Man should break the foruth wall, make cutaway gags like Peter Griffin, work directly for SHIELD, keep civilian characters almost non-existent and generally not deal with anything outside his superhero career.

Basically for the franchise to stick close to Mirage as much as possible. Same reason you didn't see any original cartoon or Archie characters in the 2k3 series.


Not such a vision to be honest. The Mirage stuff (flawed as it may be) is still the start of TMNT and well of creativity, most of the FW cartoon is just a rushed pile of cartoon clichés, bad jokes and a showcase of toys they wanted sold. TMNT doesn't really don't need Bebop, Rocksteady or Krang when you get right down to it.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
01-31-2017, 08:48 AM
TMNT doesn't really don't need Bebop, Rocksteady or Krang when you get right down to it.

It needs them, or else Purple Dragons, Utroms and Triceratons (or Armaggon and Verminator X if you want Archie antagonists).

neatoman
01-31-2017, 11:17 AM
It needs them, or else Purple Dragons, Utroms and Triceratons (or Armaggon and Verminator X if you want Archie antagonists).

I don't really understand what you mean.

CyberCubed
01-31-2017, 11:30 AM
Probably that Mirage doesn't have enough major characters alone. Same reason 2k3 series had to invent Hun, Bishop and a whole bunch of other secondary new villains like Ultimate Ninja, Draco, Touch and Go, all the FF villains, Nano, etc.

There really aren't many major characters in Mirage, outside the core major cast that appears in every series like Shredder, Karai, Baxter, Rat King, Leatherhead, etc.

neatoman
01-31-2017, 11:37 AM
Probably that Mirage doesn't have enough major characters alone. Same reason 2k3 series had to invent Hun, Bishop and a whole bunch of other secondary new villains like Ultimate Ninja, Draco, Touch and Go, all the FF villains, Nano, etc.

There really aren't many major characters in Mirage, outside the core major cast that appears in every series like Shredder, Karai, Baxter, Rat King, Leatherhead, etc.

Well, there's that I guess. Though it still doesn't mean you need Bebop and Rocksteady.

IndigoErth
01-31-2017, 12:17 PM
Honestly, at the moment I'm to the point of being entirely fine with having a break from them anyhow. You can only rehash the same basic stories (albeit in slightly new ways) so much before driving it into the ground.

Somebody please someday stop trying to reinvent the wheel and imagine what the Turtles' 20+ years would be like. (Preferably with a Mirage/2003 tone.) There's no reason it really even has to be all that different; still together as a family, they're simply older, wiser, even better skilled individually and as a team, and facing new criminals and villains plaguing the city/world. There's so much room for them to grow, and yet that old wheel just keeps getting new, if vaguely different, tread. The safe zone of the tried and true, I guess...

Kendamu
01-31-2017, 03:15 PM
Tales of the TMNT ended because Mirage/Pete didn't want to put out any more issues. It has nothing to do with the sale to Nick.

Mirage still has the rights to publish 12-18 comics a year and has had those rights since the sale. They could have had Mirage comics coming out alongside IDW over these last 5 years, but Peter simply doesn't care to do so.

Seems to me that it was put there so that he could complete his own story if he wanted to. I never imagined it having anything to do with Tales and this is honestly the first I've heard of it having anything to do with Tales.

CyberCubed
01-31-2017, 03:44 PM
Seems to me that it was put there so that he could complete his own story if he wanted to. I never imagined it having anything to do with Tales and this is honestly the first I've heard of it having anything to do with Tales.

I only mention Tales because you did. But in any case, Pete can publish any Mirage comic he wants to at any time. He just has no interest.

ToTheNines
01-31-2017, 04:17 PM
Pretty frustrating to know that Peter could easily facilitate stuff like Tristan Jones' Gang War conclusion, but just won't.

Not that I want a whole slew of new Mirage stuff, I've made my peace with its "death". And Modeen's Odyssey was likely a million times better than any volume 4 conclusion. But the gang war non-ending stings.

Any other Mirage story-lines left unfinished?

RaphaelinSTL
01-31-2017, 05:14 PM
Disney would probably give the TMNT franchise more publicity, but I don't think it's worth that.

Honestly, I feel if Disney would've bought the franchise the live action movies would've been handled with much more care and respect than the terrible Platinum Dunes films. Say what you will about the Marvel films being a little too formulaic, they at least get the heart of the characters and can turn out substantial comic book movies that hold enough weight story wise and are true to what makes these characters so likeable in the first place.

Now we may not have gotten as rich of an animated series like the current Nick show or heck...not even the wonderful IDW comic...but I feel that Disney's team would've handled the live action movies far better.

Powder
01-31-2017, 06:49 PM
Pretty frustrating to know that Peter could easily facilitate stuff like Tristan Jones' Gang War conclusion, but just won't.

Not that I want a whole slew of new Mirage stuff, I've made my peace with its "death". And Modeen's Odyssey was likely a million times better than any volume 4 conclusion. But the gang war non-ending stings.

Any other Mirage story-lines left unfinished?

Yeah, it is a major bummer. But I sympathize with the guy. All the same, I really wish he'd just have enough faith in Jim/Dan/whoever else to oversee & facilitate another run. I'm not sure how many other unfinished plots or unexplored things remain, but I'm certain there's more than enough to make for another volume of Tales or something. What Andrew was able to do with content from the RPG books alone is quite amazing. Lots of untapped potential in the Mirage universe. Just goes to show you can churn out new material with old ties relatively easily. Not to mention you can go the IDW route of doing single character issues, which Tales did a fair bit, but could continue to do in wonderful ways, I'm sure. A story dealing with Karai's ascension to power in the Japanese branch of The Foot, a glimpse into the life of Hamato Yoshi, revisiting a story that already happened but told from a different character's perspective, etc.

There's always (semi-official) fan-works, at least. :trazz:

Jephael
01-31-2017, 08:22 PM
Pretty frustrating to know that Peter could easily facilitate stuff like Tristan Jones' Gang War conclusion, but just won't.

Not that I want a whole slew of new Mirage stuff, I've made my peace with its "death". And Modeen's Odyssey was likely a million times better than any volume 4 conclusion. But the gang war non-ending stings.

Any other Mirage story-lines left unfinished?

What was the Gang War thing about? I don't think I ever read that.

ToTheNines
01-31-2017, 08:30 PM
What was the Gang War thing about? I don't think I ever read that.

See # 36, 50, 56, 59, 61 and 64 of Tales Volume 2.

Wildcat
01-31-2017, 11:18 PM
Ultimate Spider-Man pissed me off and I get the feeling most other Spider-Man fans were pissed off as well. Granted, season 4 was OK but it didn't ever fully redeem itself.

Avengers Assemble, Agents of SMASH, Guardians of the Galaxy and Ultimate Spider-Man all share similar problems, in that they're about the lamest thing they could have made but USM makes my blood boil the most, it takes everything about what makes Spider-Man a compelling concept and just gets it wrong. The show thinks Spider-Man should break the foruth wall, make cutaway gags like Peter Griffin, work directly for SHIELD, keep civilian characters almost non-existent and generally not deal with anything outside his superhero career.Not trying to go off topic. I see what you're saying but wasn't that the point? It's not that they messed up Spider-Man. They purposely wanted to do a big super hero alliance thing with the whole shared universe...Marvel's Spider-Man is coming so there's that.

If Disney did a TMNT cartoon I doubt it would have been like USM. It doesn't have enough characters to do that unless it crossed over everything and basically made "Turtles Forever: The series". They probably would have made a straightforward retelling again.

CyberCubed
02-01-2017, 12:07 AM
If Disney did a TMNT cartoon I doubt it would have been like USM. It doesn't have enough characters to do that unless it crossed over everything and basically made "Turtles Forever: The series". They probably would have made a straightforward retelling again.

Uh, what? All we're saying is Marvel's current action/superhero cartoons have all been terrible. If those same people made a TMNT cartoon, it'd likely be just as bad. The current head of Marvel animation does a horrible job with these shows.

Xav
02-01-2017, 03:20 AM
No they're not. They are just not to your liking.

ToTheNines
02-01-2017, 03:25 AM
Objectively speaking... they're ****ing dogshit.

Kendamu
02-01-2017, 03:55 AM
Objectively speaking... they're ****ing dogshit.

http://i.imgur.com/Kz65bTj.gif


I really have no opinion of the shows. I just wanted to use that GIF.

ToTheNines
02-01-2017, 04:17 AM
You're out of your element Kendamu.

Kendamu
02-01-2017, 04:19 AM
You're out of your element Kendamu.

You might've missed it the first time, so I'll say it again:

I really have no opinion of the shows. I just wanted to use that GIF.

ToTheNines
02-01-2017, 04:34 AM
Lol... my retort was, in turn, a quote from The Big Lebowski.

Tried to be funny. Deaf ears.

http://i.imgur.com/VY1OnHI.gif

Powder
02-01-2017, 05:03 AM
I got it, & I don't even like that movie. :tlol:

neatoman
02-01-2017, 07:46 AM
Not trying to go off topic. I see what you're saying but wasn't that the point? It's not that they messed up Spider-Man. They purposely wanted to do a big super hero alliance thing with the whole shared universe...Marvel's Spider-Man is coming so there's that.

If Disney did a TMNT cartoon I doubt it would have been like USM. It doesn't have enough characters to do that unless it crossed over everything and basically made "Turtles Forever: The series". They probably would have made a straightforward retelling again.

Uh, what? All we're saying is Marvel's current action/superhero cartoons have all been terrible. If those same people made a TMNT cartoon, it'd likely be just as bad. The current head of Marvel animation does a horrible job with these shows.

No they're not. They are just not to your liking.

Objectively speaking... they're ****ing dogshit.

They are, they really are dogshit. Muted colors, cookie cutter art style, sub-par writing, reliance of after effects and copying the movies in too many aspects, regardless of wheter or not it makes sense for a cartoon. I'd rather watch Spider-Man Unlimited and MTV Spider-Man back to back four times than sit through all of Ultimate, at least they had some kind of integrity...

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
02-01-2017, 08:25 AM
Somebody please someday stop trying to reinvent the wheel and imagine what the Turtles' 20+ years would be like. (Preferably with a Mirage/2003 tone.)

It's probably because of the "Teenage" title it's so hard to get past that.

IndigoErth
02-01-2017, 11:18 AM
Which is a shame. Esp since it's so common to just refer to them in short as the 'Ninja Turtles' anyhow. (Wish people hadn't flipped over 2014's title... Hope future Turtle makers forget about that.)

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
02-01-2017, 11:23 AM
Which is a shame. Esp since it's so common to just refer to them in short as the 'Ninja Turtles' anyhow. (Wish people hadn't flipped over 2014's title... Hope future Turtle makers forget about that.)

Next Mutation did an early attempt with just the Ninja Turtles title.

Andrew NDB
02-01-2017, 11:26 AM
Which is a shame. Esp since it's so common to just refer to them in short as the 'Ninja Turtles' anyhow. (Wish people hadn't flipped over 2014's title... Hope future Turtle makers forget about that.)

Why? Now they've got the title still in the bank, to be used for something else. Something else that's not ghastly.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
02-01-2017, 11:29 AM
Wish people hadn't flipped over 2014's title...

Probably because Michael Bay said it was because they would be extraterrestrials...

CyberCubed
02-01-2017, 11:39 AM
It's kind of ironic IDW TMNT is going to wind up being the longest lasting TMNT incarnation. Unless you count Mirage's continual run from 1984-2010, but they had huge breaks inbetween.

ToTheNines
02-01-2017, 11:42 AM
Ironic how?

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
02-01-2017, 11:49 AM
It's kind of ironic IDW TMNT is going to wind up being the longest lasting TMNT incarnation.

Archie run for longer time than IDW (August 1988-March 1996)

Jephael
02-01-2017, 11:53 AM
It's kind of ironic IDW TMNT is going to wind up being the longest lasting TMNT incarnation. Unless you count Mirage's continual run from 1984-2010, but they had huge breaks inbetween.

Archie run for longer time than IDW (August 1988-March 1996)

From how previous discussions/arguments have gone in the past I've deduced CyberCubed doesn't have much respect for the Archie series, hence he never really gives it much recognition.

CyberCubed
02-01-2017, 12:04 PM
From how previous discussions/arguments have gone in the past I've deduced CyberCubed doesn't have much respect for the Archie series, hence he never really gives it much recognition.

WTF? I said IDW is going to "wind up having the longest run" of a TMNT series, I didn't say it already did. Do you not understand future tense?

Of course right now Archie went on longer, but IDW TMNT is looking to have a 10+ year run.

Jephael
02-01-2017, 12:09 PM
WTF? I said IDW is going to "wind up having the longest run" of a TMNT series, I didn't say it already did. Do you not understand future tense?

Of course right now Archie went on longer, but IDW TMNT is looking to have a 10+ year run.

That's all fine and good, but how come you glossed over Archie in your initial statement? I respect that Mirage is the source of all things Ninja Turtles and they deserve to be recognized for that, but at the same time you can't ignore how successful Archie Comics was with them as well.

CyberCubed
02-01-2017, 12:13 PM
LOL, what? I like the Archie run a lot and read through it several times. I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

I only brought up Mirage because it lasted 25 years, and said IDW would likely be the longest lasting otherwise. Just because I didn't name-drop Archie doesn't mean I ignore it. I literally own every single Archie issue in my comic cabinets right now.

Jephael
02-01-2017, 12:22 PM
I like the Archie run a lot and read through it several times. I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

Just because I didn't name-drop Archie doesn't mean I ignore it.

Well, maybe I'm too biased about the Archie comics. They meant a lot to me as a kid and sometimes certain comments people make about them tend to upset me. To be honest, I kinda wish Warner Bros. had bought the rights to TMNT as they could've easily adapted most of those stories into an animated series the same way 4Kids adapted Mirage. I would still love to see what Null, Kid Terra and the Malignoids would sound like.

IndigoErth
02-01-2017, 12:23 PM
Why? Now they've got the title still in the bank, to be used for something else. Something else that's not ghastly.
? You mean like, in essence, the PD film didn't get its cooties on it so it's still safe to use? lol

Really I meant in terms of fan reaction hopefully not scaring someone else away from ever trying to "alter" the title.

Probably because Michael Bay said it was because they would be extraterrestrials...
True.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
02-01-2017, 12:39 PM
Well, maybe I'm too biased about the Archie comics. They meant a lot to me as a kid and sometimes certain comments people make about them tend to upset me. To be honest, I kinda wish Warner Bros. had bought the rights to TMNT as they could've easily adapted most of those stories into an animated series the same way 4Kids adapted Mirage. I would still love to see what Null, Kid Terra and the Malignoids would sound like.

That's the thing for an upcoming series somewhere in the 2020's.

If you also like Archie, you should listen to the Turtlesoup podcast.

http://turtlesoupshow.com/

It's about two persons who review most TMNT cartoons and comics, and I mainly listen to it becasue of their Archie reviews. They like it, and it's great listening to people being positive with something (instead of all bashings for the sake of bashing..).

LeotheLateBloomer
02-01-2017, 12:47 PM
? You mean like, in essence, the PD film didn't get its cooties on it so it's still safe to use? lol

Really I meant in terms of fan reaction hopefully not scaring someone else away from ever trying to "alter" the title.

Sort of like how Marvel changes the "The Amazing Spider-Man" title to Spider-Man in other media.

superstaff
02-01-2017, 02:36 PM
Ironic how?

Probably because of how recent it is compared to other TMNT series that are much older, such as the original Mirage ones which I think don't quite count as longest running due to the aforementioned breaks.

It's probably because of the "Teenage" title it's so hard to get past that.

Yeah, basically. I'll admit, it might be a little strange to have a new show start when they're already adults instead of having them gradually grow older or some such.

CyberCubed
02-01-2017, 02:55 PM
Probably because of how recent it is compared to other TMNT series that are much older, such as the original Mirage ones which I think don't quite count as longest running due to the aforementioned breaks.

Yep, it's also due to the fact that the older stuff will always feel like it "lasts longer" in any fandom due to it being when a series starts and most fans being young kids at the time making it seem like it went on forever. Time moves faster as an adult. For example the 4kids TMNT series is now 14 years old...having started back in 2003. Yet it sure doesn't feel that way for some reason. Same thing with the people in other fandoms like pokemon who don't realize Misty's been gone over 14 years as well. :lol:

superstaff
02-01-2017, 03:25 PM
Yep, it's also due to the fact that the older stuff will always feel like it "lasts longer" in any fandom due to it being when a series starts and most fans being young kids at the time making it seem like it went on forever. Time moves faster as an adult. For example the 4kids TMNT series is now 14 years old...having started back in 2003. Yet it sure doesn't feel that way for some reason. Same thing with the people in other fandoms like pokemon who don't realize Misty's been gone over 14 years as well. :lol:

Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. I still vividly remember the day I found out about TMNT 2K3 premiering, and I was about fifteen or so. I guess a part of it is that franchises like TMNT and Pokemon endure for a long time, and have a lot of elements that make them memorable even when they're not around (though in Pokemon's case, the anime's been running while the newer games only appear every few years).

As for the Misty thing, that's still true. :lol: I also still see some people around who seem to be under the impression that the modern TMNT is basically still the 80s cartoon and don't seem to be aware of the recent cartoons or comics...which is really weird, but it seems to come from clueless folks outside the actual fandom.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
02-01-2017, 03:37 PM
When I was younger, I didn't consider anything from the 1970's and later to be "old", mostly because most films and TV since then have been in colour. But now I do, more an more, so eventually even the 2003-2009 animated TV-series will soon feel old even for us who recall when it aired.

CyberCubed
02-01-2017, 03:38 PM
I think the case is some adults don't actually realize how old they are, and that the kids of today are growing up with totally different things than they were.

Andrew NDB
02-01-2017, 03:49 PM
I think it has more to do with, as adults, we slip into repetition and routine, so the passage of time is more difficult to register with the brain. And then memory itself/storage doesn't work like when you were younger... and if you're retaining less memories, then it wouldn't seem like so much time has passed in your mind.

pferreira
02-02-2017, 09:18 AM
Not such a vision to be honest. The Mirage stuff (flawed as it may be) is still the start of TMNT and well of creativity, most of the FW cartoon is just a rushed pile of cartoon clichés, bad jokes and a showcase of toys they wanted sold. Oh here we go. You can't just leave it alone can you. After pages of me explaining plus me quoting at least two sources you still think the Fred Wolf cartoon had no creative ambition and that it was made episode to episode to incorporate toys. I don't claim to know everything on TMNT but when someone knows more than you on a particular subject it's good to listen. ;)

It needs them, or else Purple Dragons, Utroms and Triceratons (or Armaggon and Verminator X if you want Archie antagonists).Ha, ha! You can have so much fun with Bebop and Rocksteady. :lol:

Honestly, I feel if Disney would've bought the franchise the live action movies would've been handled with much more care and respect than the terrible Platinum Dunes films. Yeah because Disney have done wonders with Star Wars??? :o

ssjup81
02-02-2017, 09:40 AM
Honestly, at the moment I'm to the point of being entirely fine with having a break from them anyhow. You can only rehash the same basic stories (albeit in slightly new ways) so much before driving it into the ground.

Somebody please someday stop trying to reinvent the wheel and imagine what the Turtles' 20+ years would be like. (Preferably with a Mirage/2003 tone.) There's no reason it really even has to be all that different; still together as a family, they're simply older, wiser, even better skilled individually and as a team, and facing new criminals and villains plaguing the city/world. There's so much room for them to grow, and yet that old wheel just keeps getting new, if vaguely different, tread. The safe zone of the tried and true, I guess...I dunno....Geriatric Mutant Turtles just doesn't sound as catchy as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles... ^^

Andrew NDB
02-02-2017, 10:50 AM
I dunno....Geriatric Mutant Turtles just doesn't sound as catchy as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles... ^^

"NINJA TURTLES." Done. Simple. Flows off the tongue nice.

Or Erik Larsen told me once that the plan with Image/Vol. 3 was that when the Turtles hit 20, they wouldn't change the title or logo... but they'd add a big "X" over the "Teenage" in the title. Doesn't seem a terrible idea, either.

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
02-02-2017, 10:54 AM
"NINJA TURTLES." Done. Simple. Flows off the tongue nice.

Or Erik Larsen told me once that the plan with Image/Vol. 3 was that when the Turtles hit 20, they wouldn't change the title or logo... but they'd add a big "X" over the "Teenage" in the title. Doesn't seem a terrible idea, either.

That woulda been cool. But I thought they turned 20 at the beginning of the volume, Issue #1? Or was that their 19th birthday party?

Andrew NDB
02-02-2017, 10:58 AM
That woulda been cool. But I thought they turned 20 at the beginning of the volume, Issue #1? Or was that their 19th birthday party?

No, they turned 18 in #1. They turned 19 in #23.

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
02-02-2017, 11:04 AM
No, they turned 18 in #1. They turned 19 in #23.

THAT was it. Thanks, man. I'd forgotten that the series both began and ended with a birthday... which was a pretty freaking cool idea, I think. :tgrin:

Jephael
02-02-2017, 11:46 AM
Erik Larsen told me once that the plan with Image/Vol. 3 was that when the Turtles hit 20, they wouldn't change the title or logo... but they'd add a big "X" over the "Teenage" in the title. Doesn't seem a terrible idea, either.

That would've been interesting. BTW, does anyone recollect the 5-part storyarc from the Archie comics that took place in the future? The cover logo took out the word "Teenage" and replaced it with Cyber Samurai. Of course this was just a gimmick used to advertise that particular toyline Playmates had just come out with.

Andrew NDB
02-02-2017, 11:47 AM
That would've been interesting. BTW, does anyone recollect the 5-part storyarc from the Archie comics that took place in the future? The cover logo took out the word "Teenage" and replaced it with Cyber Samurai. Of course this was just a gimmick used to advertise that particular toyline Playmates had just come out with.

Which was corny and obviously mandated... but I love how they owned it and just ran with it. "Cyber Samurai? OK, fine. We'll make it work." And they did, pretty much.

TigerClaw
02-02-2017, 11:52 AM
Which was corny and obviously mandated... but I love how they owned it and just ran with it. "Cyber Samurai? OK, fine. We'll make it work." And they did, pretty much.
That was one my favorite story lines from the comics, being able to see what the Turtles were like as adults, in a future caused by global warming, and being forced to live above ground after New York got flooded.

neatoman
02-02-2017, 02:34 PM
Oh here we go. You can't just leave it alone can you. After pages of me explaining plus me quoting at least two sources you still think the Fred Wolf cartoon had no creative ambition and that it was made episode to episode to incorporate toys. I don't claim to know everything on TMNT but when someone knows more than you on a particular subject it's good to listen. ;)


Who? Fred Wolf, the man who claimed he wanted make more than a toy commercial while producing a transparent toy commercial? Or the woman who co-wrote like two or three episodes and you couldn't link her statement, just posting her alleged statement of hers from a chat? Or maybe some of David Wise's blatant and egocentric lies?

IndigoErth
02-02-2017, 03:23 PM
I dunno....Geriatric Mutant Turtles just doesn't sound as catchy as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles... ^^
Not until we're all ancient enough to appreciate it. :tlol:

Poor dears, if they go from teen to senior citizen with no adulthood between I feel bad for them.

ssjup81
02-02-2017, 03:51 PM
"NINJA TURTLES." Done. Simple. Flows off the tongue nice.

Or Erik Larsen told me once that the plan with Image/Vol. 3 was that when the Turtles hit 20, they wouldn't change the title or logo... but they'd add a big "X" over the "Teenage" in the title. Doesn't seem a terrible idea, either.No, it doesn't, but I was partially joking when saying "geriatric".

Not until we're all ancient enough to appreciate it. :tlol:

Poor dears, if they go from teen to senior citizen with no adulthood between I feel bad for them.Yeah, that would be sad.

DevilSpooky
02-02-2017, 05:49 PM
Yeah because Disney have done wonders with Star Wars??? :o

Rogue One is the best Star Wars anything since The Empire Strikes Back, and Rebels is considered one of the best as well (haven't seen that one yet so I can't give my opinion) I'll give you VII though, I really didn't enjoy that movie and Kylo "crybaby" Ren is pathetic. :trolleye:

CyberCubed
02-02-2017, 06:48 PM
The new Star Wars films were a complete success and some of the highest grossing films in recent memory. Whether you liked them or not doesn't matter given the amount of money they made.

Coola Yagami
02-03-2017, 12:12 AM
The new Star Wars films were a complete success and some of the highest grossing films in recent memory. Whether you liked them or not doesn't matter given the amount of money they made.

By that logic the Transformers movies are cinematic masterpieces. I got nothing against star wars mind you, but your statement makes it sound like a movie can be horrible as hell but as long as it makes tons of money, it just has to be good and our opinions don't matter.

neatoman
02-03-2017, 05:01 AM
By that logic the Transformers movies are cinematic masterpieces. I got nothing against star wars mind you, but your statement makes it sound like a movie can be horrible as hell but as long as it makes tons of money, it just has to be good and our opinions don't matter.

True, not everyone like the movies nor is financial gain a measure of quality, but even if the new Star Wars movies were terrible at least they weren't terrible bombs (hint hint, OotS). I mean if nothing else, at least the general reception was good and I don't think Disney regret their decisions, neither EP VII or RO have generally negative reviews or failed to make money, so at least that counts as a success in Hollywood.

pferreira
02-09-2017, 09:34 AM
Rogue One is the best Star Wars anything since The Empire Strikes Back, and Rebels is considered one of the best as well (haven't seen that one yet so I can't give my opinion) I'll give you VII though, I really didn't enjoy that movie and Kylo "crybaby" Ren is pathetic. :trolleye:Rogue One was ok but I wouldn't call it the best Star Wars film ever, that honour goes to A New Hope of course. To sum up Rogue One in one word I would call it 'unnecessary'.

True, not everyone like the movies nor is financial gain a measure of quality, but even if the new Star Wars movies were terrible at least they weren't terrible bombs (hint hint, OotS). The Turtles sequel didn't do great but I wouldn't consider it ' a terrible bomb'.

By that logic the Transformers movies are cinematic masterpieces. I got nothing against star wars mind you, but your statement makes it sound like a movie can be horrible as hell but as long as it makes tons of money, it just has to be good and our opinions don't matter.I think you got it in one. :)

Who? Fred Wolf, the man who claimed he wanted make more than a toy commercial while producing a transparent toy commercial?Again what toys were shoehorned into the episodes considering you know so much about the Fred Wolf cartoon?

Or the woman who co-wrote like two or three episodes and you couldn't link her statement, just posting her alleged statement of hers from a chat?Erm 'the woman' you refer to is Brynne Chandler who's message to you was to quit complaining about stuff you don't understand and yes she is more qualified to talk about the Turtles than you are, really no contest there. Also why would I link to my conversation with her just so you can troll it? I mean she wants to hear from people that appreciate her work, not people like you. ;)

Or maybe some of David Wise's blatant and egocentric lies?Ok you've lost me now. :o

neatoman
02-09-2017, 11:31 AM
Erm 'the woman' you refer to is Brynne Chandler who's message to you was to quit complaining about stuff you don't understand and yes she is more qualified to talk about the Turtles than you are, really no contest there. Also why would I link to my conversation with her just so you can troll it? I mean she wants to hear from people that appreciate her work, not people like you. ;)


I want to make sure you're not quote mining.

DevilSpooky
02-10-2017, 02:27 AM
Rogue One was ok but I wouldn't call it the best Star Wars film ever, that honour goes to A New Hope of course. To sum up Rogue One in one word I would call it 'unnecessary'.


I never said it was the best Star Wars movie ever, I said it was the best thing released under the Star Wars name since the release of The Empire Strikes Back (the actual best SW movie ever, and that not an opinion, that's fact :trazz:)

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
02-11-2017, 04:02 AM
I wish we could still get Archie's "Forever War" one day.

pferreira
02-16-2017, 09:38 AM
I never said it was the best Star Wars movie ever, I said it was the best thing released under the Star Wars name since the release of The Empire Strikes Back (the actual best SW movie ever, and that not an opinion, that's fact :trazz:)Ok that's cool. I just don't feel that way. I don't rate The Empire Strikes Back as the best Star Wars movie. Yeah, call me odd but then I'm not one to hop on the bandwagon. I still consider A New Hope the best Star Wars movie with Return of the Jedi second. :)

I want to make sure you're not quote mining.I know you're going to have to trust me but no I'm not quote mining. I asked her a few questions about the show over Facebook and she was polite enough to answer and talk to me about writing in general back then compared to now. :)

myconius
02-16-2017, 09:55 AM
Well if Disney or Warner Brothers got to TMNT, then TMNT comics would probably be a neglected aspect of Marvel or DC. Fox or Universal, maybe even Sony?

thank goodness it wasn't picked up by Warner or Disney.

from a comics standpoint it would have been a total disaster!

Andrew NDB
02-16-2017, 10:05 AM
The Turtles sequel didn't do great but I wouldn't consider it ' a terrible bomb'.

You go and lose 100 million for investors for your movie and see how non-bomb like that is. In fact, see if you ever work in the movie business again.

Ok that's cool. I just don't feel that way. I don't rate The Empire Strikes Back as the best Star Wars movie. Yeah, call me odd but then I'm not one to hop on the bandwagon. I still consider A New Hope the best Star Wars movie with Return of the Jedi second. :)

I kind of agree. I don't like all of RotJ, but the parts I do, I like better than most anything in Empire. And a great ending.

oldmanwinters
02-16-2017, 11:25 AM
You go and lose 100 million for investors for your movie and see how non-bomb like that is. In fact, see if you ever work in the movie business again.

I'm very curious why all the talking studio heads continue to talk about the Ghostbusters summer reboot as a "success," but OotS as a "disappointment" since I'm sure they're both in the same boat, internet controversies notwithstanding.


I kind of agree. I don't like all of RotJ, but the parts I do, I like better than most anything in Empire. And a great ending.

Pretty much the whole arc with Jabba's Palace and the Sarlacc Pit is maybe my favorite moment of anything Star Wars... before Lucas decided to make it "special." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiDRgDmXGi4)

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
02-16-2017, 12:42 PM
[QUOTE=pferreira;1657350]Ha, ha! You can have so much fun with Bebop and Rocksteady. :lol:/QUOTE]

If so, I want to see more of their deadly sides.

DevilSpooky
02-17-2017, 10:14 PM
Ok that's cool. I just don't feel that way. I don't rate The Empire Strikes Back as the best Star Wars movie. Yeah, call me odd but then I'm not one to hop on the bandwagon. I still consider A New Hope the best Star Wars movie with Return of the Jedi second. :)



Oh far from it, I'm also against lemmings, one should like what he likes, for me it goes TESB>ANH=RO>ROTJ=ROTS>TPM>TFA=AOTC. See, I don't jump on the bandwagon neither, I kinda hated The Force Awakens :tcool:

Redeemer
02-18-2017, 01:17 AM
I'd say we wouldn't have got anything new if Nickelodeon never bought TMNT. Peter Laird had grown tired of it and wanted to move on.

The franchise was dead in the water when Nickelodeon bought it.

I guess everyone forgot the movie that PL was making?????

They were trying to reboot the franchise with more serious movie, which I imagine would have been like a Mirage style TMNT.
The movie was toward the end of the casting stage if I remember correctly.

I think we would have gotten a couple movies, but I don't think we would have gotten a new comic line or a new cartoon sense the 4kids cartoon just ended.

CyberCubed
02-18-2017, 01:36 AM
Wasn't the movie deal dead in the water? If it was well into production that would have come out circa around 2010-2011 at the latest.

pferreira
02-23-2017, 09:07 AM
You go and lose 100 million for investors for your movie and see how non-bomb like that is. In fact, see if you ever work in the movie business again.It was only a bomb the same way Batman and Robin was. It was a success but didn't make four times it's budget back.

I kind of agree. I don't like all of RotJ, but the parts I do, I like better than most anything in Empire. And a great ending.I love Return of the Jedi and yes it did have a great ending. More shame that The Force Awakens totally undid all that. :-?

Oh far from it, I'm also against lemmings, one should like what he likes, for me it goes TESB>ANH=RO>ROTJ=ROTS>TPM>TFA=AOTC. See, I don't jump on the bandwagon neither, I kinda hated The Force Awakens :tcool:For me it's ANH>ROTJ>ESB>ROTS>RO>TFA>AOTC>TPM. The last three shift depending how I feel. The Force Awakens had more riding on it since it brought back the original characters so it could be the worst out of all of them, then again it has the original characters back so by default it should be the better movie.

neatoman
02-23-2017, 09:50 AM
It was only a bomb the same way Batman and Robin was. It was a success but didn't make four times it's budget back.


They didn't even make twice the budget back.

Andrew NDB
02-23-2017, 10:17 AM
Ha, ha! You can have so much fun with Bebop and Rocksteady. :lol:

If so, I want to see more of their deadly sides.

They don't have any deadly sides. Their shtick is camp and sight gags and goofy humor. They literally didn't hurt a fly in the whole Fred Wolf show that I'm aware of and this idea that they're sadistic heavy hitters is entirely imaginary and revisionist history.

It was only a bomb the same way Batman and Robin was. It was a success but didn't make four times it's budget back.

No, it wasn't a success and didn't even make one time it's budget back.

Out of the Suckitude had a 135 million dollar production budget, plus about a 100 million dollar marketing budget... probably offset to around 80 after factoring in product spots and all that. That's 215 million now, it cost to make the movie and get it out there. It made 82 million stateside. Figuring how many weekends it took to get that, and how theaters' cuts vs. studios' cuts favors the theaters with every passing weekend... Paramount maybe saw 55 of that. Maybe. Overseas, it made 162 million. A big number, right? But once you get into overseas markets, the studio only gets about 50% of the cut (what, you think, like, Denmark is running a theatrical charity, giving 100% of their ticket sales to American studios?)... so that leaves 81 million overseas, in Paramount's pockets.

Where does that leave us? Out of the Shadows netted 136 million against a 215 production/marketing budget. Ouch.

oldmanwinters
02-23-2017, 04:17 PM
Where does that leave us? Out of the Shadows netted 136 million against a 215 production/marketing budget. Ouch.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a56/slimer2erasmus/ProfessorCatPessimism_zpsnzrobof6.jpg (http://s9.photobucket.com/user/slimer2erasmus/media/ProfessorCatPessimism_zpsnzrobof6.jpg.html)

neatoman
02-25-2017, 03:58 AM
They don't have any deadly sides. Their shtick is camp and sight gags and goofy humor. They literally didn't hurt a fly in the whole Fred Wolf show that I'm aware of and this idea that they're sadistic heavy hitters is entirely imaginary and revisionist history.


Wait, they're not just talking about about the IDW version? There are actually people who think they were like that in the cartoon? That's kind of hilarious.

ssjup81
02-25-2017, 06:15 AM
You go and lose 100 million for investors for your movie and see how non-bomb like that is. In fact, see if you ever work in the movie business again.



I kind of agree. I don't like all of RotJ, but the parts I do, I like better than most anything in Empire. And a great ending.
Return of the Jedi was my favorite as a kid because I liked the Ewoks. lol

pferreira
03-02-2017, 09:14 AM
They didn't even make twice the budget back.No but I wouldn't say they were total flops.

Where does that leave us? Out of the Shadows netted 136 million against a 215 production/marketing budget. Ouch.I get what you're saying, the film needed to make at least twice as much money back. I just think it would have been worse had the film not broke even.

They don't have any deadly sides. Their shtick is camp and sight gags and goofy humor. They literally didn't hurt a fly in the whole Fred Wolf show that I'm aware of and this idea that they're sadistic heavy hitters is entirely imaginary and revisionist history.Bebop and Rocksteady were brawn over brains. They were totally destructive because they were strong but also because they were thick. Go back the pilot, they gave the Turtles a run for their money when they were first introduced only for the Turtles to show more intelligence than them. Throughout the cartoon the mutants continue to cause mayhem. They can't really say on the cartoon that off screen someone has been killed but at least on screen they don't kill anyone. So I ask the question: are Bebop and Rocksteady a threat in the FW cartoon with my answer being yes and no. They don't kill anyone but they can cause enough carnage to be a threat to the Turtles. They are comedy henchmen but their brute strength as well as reckless behaviour with weapons also makes them trouble. Anyone who says they were evil and dark characters on the series have no idea what they're talking about.

Return of the Jedi was my favorite as a kid because I liked the Ewoks. lolStill is for me. :lol:

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
03-02-2017, 04:39 PM
Bebop and Rocksteady almost killed Splinter twice.

Andrew NDB
03-02-2017, 04:42 PM
Bebop and Rocksteady were brawn over brains. They were totally destructive because they were strong but also because they were thick. Go back the pilot, they gave the Turtles a run for their money when they were first introduced only for the Turtles to show more intelligence than them. Throughout the cartoon the mutants continue to cause mayhem. They can't really say on the cartoon that off screen someone has been killed but at least on screen they don't kill anyone. So I ask the question: are Bebop and Rocksteady a threat in the FW cartoon with my answer being yes and no. They don't kill anyone but they can cause enough carnage to be a threat to the Turtles.

Which episodes specifically did they cause "enough carnage to be a threat to the Turtles"? And forget killing, was there even a single episode of the Fred Wolf show where Bebop and Rocksteady even semi-seriously hurt anyone? Even lightly?

Technogeek29
03-02-2017, 04:44 PM
Which episodes specifically did they cause "enough carnage to be a threat to the Turtles"? And forget killing, was there even a single episode of the Fred Wolf show where Bebop and Rocksteady even semi-seriously hurt anyone? Even lightly?

Besides Bebop violently choking Splinter in Splintered & Shreded I can't recall?

neatoman
03-03-2017, 08:22 AM
Which episodes specifically did they cause "enough carnage to be a threat to the Turtles"? And forget killing, was there even a single episode of the Fred Wolf show where Bebop and Rocksteady even semi-seriously hurt anyone? Even lightly?

I can barely even remember any kind destruction. I can remember Bebop punching a hole in a wall once and that's about it, I guess they frequently demonstrated strength by heavy lifting but hardly any destruction.

ssjup81
03-03-2017, 01:35 PM
I can barely even remember any kind destruction. I can remember Bebop punching a hole in a wall once and that's about it, I guess they frequently demonstrated strength by heavy lifting but hardly any destruction.When the show was still allowed to use real guns, despite having bad aim because, you know, kids show, Rocksteady open fired on them if that counts. ^^

But getting down to it, they were both portrayed as super strong, especially Bebop in the beginning.

Andrew NDB
03-03-2017, 01:38 PM
When the show was still allowed to use real guns

"Real" ray guns, though, wasn't it? That shot purple bolts or something?

ssjup81
03-03-2017, 01:52 PM
"Real" ray guns, though, wasn't it? That shot purple bolts or something?No, real bullets. Rocksteady was using a real gun that ep. The cops had them too in that first Neutrino ep, iirc.

CyberCubed
03-03-2017, 02:32 PM
Bebop/Rocksteady's most commonly used guns were these laser guns:

https://media.giphy.com/media/ynKQYrJvjev7O/giphy.gif

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-859sQhgtdN0/VD4HqMuvZeI/AAAAAAAAE9g/tTSW_k6Smc8/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2014-10-15%2Bat%2B1.34.56%2BAM.png

ssjup81
03-03-2017, 04:18 PM
Yeah, they did, but for the one ep I mentíoned, Rocksteady used a real gun.

Tetsu Deinonychus
03-08-2017, 12:44 PM
I never saw ray-guns as some horrible act of censorship anyway. If you ask me, ray-guns are even more bad@$$. And, if censors think they're shielding children from the existence of guns by using ray-guns in cartoons, the joke's really on them.

Coola Yagami
03-08-2017, 01:27 PM
I never saw ray-guns as some horrible act of censorship anyway. If you ask me, ray-guns are even more bad@$$. And, if censors think they're shielding children from the existence of guns by using ray-guns in cartoons, the joke's really on them.

But the most ray guns ever do is knock you back or knock you out without any lasting repercussions. Even the most dangerous bad guys would set their guns to stun, and some time bebop and Rocksteady's guns were flat out called stun lasers or stun guns. So there's no risk of flesh wounds, blood loss, worrying about getting the bullet out or flat out death. They can shoot Leo all they want, just splash water on him and he'll wake up without the need to rush him to get medical attention. So yeah, that does count as censorship.

CyberCubed
03-08-2017, 01:52 PM
The laser guns were popularized by Star Wars, obviously. Star Wars came out only a few years before TMNT did. Back in the 80's especially everyone loved laser guns because they were "futuristic" and "so cool."

ToTheNines
03-08-2017, 01:58 PM
It came out over a decade before the FW cartoon.

CyberCubed
03-08-2017, 02:00 PM
It came out over a decade before the FW cartoon.

But the last movie came out in 1983, and was obviously still a huge phenomenon by the time the original cartoon came out.

Then there was Terminator in 1984 which also used laser guns.

pferreira
03-09-2017, 01:13 PM
I can barely even remember any kind destruction. I can remember Bebop punching a hole in a wall once and that's about it, I guess they frequently demonstrated strength by heavy lifting but hardly any destruction.

Which episodes specifically did they cause "enough carnage to be a threat to the Turtles"? And forget killing, was there even a single episode of the Fred Wolf show where Bebop and Rocksteady even semi-seriously hurt anyone? Even lightly?They caused a huge amount of destruction, essentially any time Shredder asked them to do something in the episodes they featured in. Obviously they can't show people getting hurt because it's a kids cartoon. As mentioned before they caused complete carnage firstly because they were really strong (basically they were mutant heavies). Secondly you leave trigger happy mutants with no brains in charge of an arsenal of weaponry and yeah they'll cause a lot of damage. I mean in Planet of the Turtleoids Shredder just left them in charge for a short time of the caged zoo animals and in less than a couple of minutes the two through their trigger happy recklessness accidently freed all the caged animals by shooting at their cages. Now that was only a small example. The stuff they destroyed in other episodes by trying to destroy the Turtles was crazy! The only way to defeat the two was brains over brawn, a tactic the Turtles nearly always used.

But the last movie came out in 1983, and was obviously still a huge phenomenon by the time the original cartoon came out.

Then there was Terminator in 1984 which also used laser guns.Indeed. Star Wars was still popular into the late 80s due to VHS. I wouldn't be surprised if kids shows in Star Wars absence from the screen had lightsabers as weapons.

ssjup81
03-09-2017, 02:29 PM
They caused a huge amount of destruction, essentially any time Shredder asked them to do something in the episodes they featured in. Obviously they can't show people getting hurt because it's a kids cartoon. As mentioned before they caused complete carnage firstly because they were really strong (basically they were mutant heavies). Secondly you leave trigger happy mutants with no brains in charge of an arsenal of weaponry and yeah they'll cause a lot of damage. I mean in Planet of the Turtleoids Shredder just left them in charge for a short time of the caged zoo animals and in less than a couple of minutes the two through their trigger happy recklessness accidently freed all the caged animals by shooting at their cages. Now that was only a small example. This junk about destruction reminded me of this clip I made a few years ago. lol

Qar3oBnz9_8

Son of Return of the Fly II. Man I loved Raphael for that ep and his impatience. lol They kept saying that "the destruction of other people's property" line throughout the episode, including Bebop or Rocksteady, but then they were like, "We're bad guys", screw that.:tlol:

The stuff they destroyed in other episodes by trying to destroy the Turtles was crazy! The only way to defeat the two was brains over brawn, a tactic the Turtles nearly always used.This was definitely the case for the earlier eps.

Original TMNT Cartoon Fan
03-11-2017, 05:53 AM
Indeed. Star Wars was still popular into the late 80s due to VHS. I wouldn't be surprised if kids shows in Star Wars absence from the screen had lightsabers as weapons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raygun

Rayguns have been common in science fiction since at least the late-19th century.

Panda_Kahn_fan
03-13-2017, 05:57 PM
Yes, Bebop and Rocksteady are dangerous and deadly, the only goofy version are the Fred Wolf ones. The IDW versions massacred a whole unit of foot soldiers, wiped out/murdered and entire triad gang called the ghosts, beat Donatello to death and cracked his shell wide open, knocked the combined forces of the TMNT and Mutantinmals around, beat up (Mirage) Savante Romero and stole his time sceptre, and went on a crazy joyride through time and space spreading Mayhem, murder, and destruction. It takes massive bombs and explosive to take them down, and Bebop and Rocksteady have possibly the highest personal kill count on-panel in all of IDW, and IDW is not revisionist or imaginary. I don't give a %$#@! what they were like in Fred Wolf, IDW Bebop and Rocksteady are the definitive versions. And they NOT goofy and silly.

Andrew NDB
03-13-2017, 08:58 PM
IDW is not revisionist

About Bebop and Rocksteady? How are they not? They completely revised their characters into things they were never and never meant to be.

Xav
03-13-2017, 09:19 PM
Yes, Bebop and Rocksteady are dangerous and deadly, the only goofy version are the Fred Wolf ones.i'm guessing you haven't seen any version of the characters outside Fred Wolf and IDW?

Powder
03-13-2017, 09:23 PM
Yes, Bebop and Rocksteady are dangerous and deadly, the only goofy version are the Fred Wolf ones. The IDW versions massacred a whole unit of foot soldiers, wiped out/murdered and entire triad gang called the ghosts, beat Donatello to death and cracked his shell wide open, knocked the combined forces of the TMNT and Mutantinmals around, beat up (Mirage) Savante Romero and stole his time sceptre, and went on a crazy joyride through time and space spreading Mayhem, murder, and destruction. It takes massive bombs and explosive to take them down, and Bebop and Rocksteady have possibly the highest personal kill count on-panel in all of IDW, and IDW is not revisionist or imaginary. I don't give a %$#@! what they were like in Fred Wolf, IDW Bebop and Rocksteady are the definitive versions. And they NOT goofy and silly.

Dangerous, sure. Deadly? In one iteration. "The only goofy version are the Fred Wolf ones" is such a BS statement. They're goofy in literally every single iteration that exists, & that will never change. IDW aren't revisionist? Everything you just described directly contradicts that considering they've completely changed the characters. You read B&R Destroy Everything, obviously, so how can you say they're not goofy/silly? That's their entire MO. Always. Just because they can kill doesn't mean they aren't idiot comic relief... :trolleye: You never cease to make me roll my eyes.

Panda_Kahn_fan
03-13-2017, 11:01 PM
About Bebop and Rocksteady? How are they not? They completely revised their characters into things they were never and never meant to be.

Revisionist would be to go back and trying to say bebop and Rocksteady in Fred Wolf were not goofy. IDW made brand new versions. Revisionism is rewriting a narrative that is already established, IDW is telling a new narrative. If you are using the word to mean they remade the characters as dangerous and destructive, then you are correct. But I see no problem with such an improvement, as such 'revisionism has happened throughout comics history. (How much are many of the ultimate characters like their Main universe counterparts? How different do characters become in a comic series continuity reboot?)

Panda_Kahn_fan
03-13-2017, 11:10 PM
Dangerous, sure. Deadly? In one iteration. "The only goofy version are the Fred Wolf ones" is such a BS statement. They're goofy in literally every single iteration that exists, & that will never change. IDW aren't revisionist? Everything you just described directly contradicts that considering they've completely changed the characters. You read B&R Destroy Everything, obviously, so how can you say they're not goofy/silly? That's their entire MO. Always. Just because they can kill doesn't mean they aren't idiot comic relief... :trolleye: You never cease to make me roll my eyes.

I guess I'm talking the difference between entertaining goofy and silly and 'this is so painful to watch/read I hate these characters' goofy and silly. I was protesting the characters as portrayed in IDW being lumped together with the Fred Wolf versions in terms of silliness. And besides, I really Don't find anything silly about slaughtering whole groups of gangsters and ninjas, and I certainly didn't find Donnie getting cracked open like an egg goofy or silly at all.

Powder
03-13-2017, 11:17 PM
And besides, I really Don't find anything silly about slaughtering whole groups of gangsters and ninjas, and I certainly didn't find Donnie getting cracked open like an egg goofy or silly at all.

Again:

Just because they can kill doesn't mean they aren't idiot comic relief...

I don't get you. The fact they do some stuff that isn't inherently goofy doesn't make them not goofy. That's like saying a murderer isn't cruel just 'cause he let a cashier keep the change. :tlol:

You know who else did unspeakable things while being goofy? Godzilla, Manson, Hitler, the list goes on.

Panda_Kahn_fan
03-13-2017, 11:26 PM
Again:



I don't get you. The fact they do some stuff that isn't inherently goofy doesn't make them not goofy. That's like saying a murderer isn't cruel just 'cause he let a cashier keep the change. :tlol:

Again, you missed what I said about entertaining goofy, and 'this is so painful I hate these characters' goofy. Fred Wolf versions I'd never want to see in a serious TMNT work. The IDW versions could work in almost any serious version (Unless you're going for mirage-level serious... and no that's not a dig at mirage, it's a compliment)

ssjup81
03-14-2017, 12:13 AM
About Bebop and Rocksteady? How are they not? They completely revised their characters into things they were never and never meant to be.How about implied? It was a different time. For a visual medium (well, television anyway) it’s not like they could show the bad guys actually killing people or anyone being killed or dying for that matter. Bebop and Rocksteady were gang members…they had to have beaten up or killed people at some point in their lives and with any destruction the two caused as mutants, can’t we just assume that someone was probably hurt/killed?

It’s like that Star child ep. The alien kid blew up those tanks, There were people in those tanks. That goofy Wally Airhead guy used his blockbuster and destroyed a building. There had to have been people in it.

So yeah, Bebop and Rocksteady were goofy, but I don’t know,..I just can’t view them as not being “dangerous” or “deadly”. Just because we weren’t allowed to see them act in such a away, doesn’t mean that they weren’t…although, later on, the latter wouldn’t surprise me. ><

Andrew NDB
03-14-2017, 12:29 AM
I just can’t view them as not being “dangerous” or “deadly”. Just because we weren’t allowed to see them act in such a away, doesn’t mean that they weren’t

That doesn't make a lick of sense. I guess because you wanted them to be a certain way, that means they probably were? Even though there's not a shred of actual evidence in their source material to back that up?

neatoman
03-14-2017, 03:05 AM
How about implied? It was a different time. For a visual medium (well, television anyway) it’s not like they could show the bad guys actually killing people or anyone being killed or dying for that matter. Bebop and Rocksteady were gang members…they had to have beaten up or killed people at some point in their lives and with any destruction the two caused as mutants, can’t we just assume that someone was probably hurt/killed?

It’s like that Star child ep. The alien kid blew up those tanks, There were people in those tanks. That goofy Wally Airhead guy used his blockbuster and destroyed a building. There had to have been people in it.

So yeah, Bebop and Rocksteady were goofy, but I don’t know,..I just can’t view them as not being “dangerous” or “deadly”. Just because we weren’t allowed to see them act in such a away, doesn’t mean that they weren’t…although, later on, the latter wouldn’t surprise me. ><

Uh yeah, **** that ********. For all we know, their criminal past might just amount to shoplifting from a candy store and refusing to pay the fine, there's no real reason to assume they ever commited any serious crime just because real life gang members do. This is a universe where the mob seems fine with dropping whatever they're doing to go on a bogus treasure hunt, or steal antiques using an antique attraction device, or live in fire hydrant shaped houses, or where trying to solve world hunger was an evil plot that had to be stopped no matter the cost.

Serious crime or violent crime doesn't really seem to exist in this world, so why should we just assume those clowns commited serious crimes when it doesn't fit the characters or the world they're in?

ssjup81
03-14-2017, 03:09 AM
Uh yeah, **** that ********. For all we know, their criminal past might just amount to shoplifting from a candy store and refusing to pay the fine, there's no real reason to assume they ever commited any serious crime just because real life gang members do. This is a universe where the mob seems fine with dropping whatever they're doing to go on a bogus treasure hunt, or steal antiques using an antique attraction device, or live in fire hydrant shaped houses, or where trying to solve world hunger was an evil plot that had to be stopped no matter the cost.

Serious crime or violent crime doesn't really seem to exist in this world, so why should we just assume those clowns commited serious crimes when it doesn't fit the characters or the world they're in?First episode, they were about to beat up April. What do you call that?

***First of Two Latin Kings***
03-14-2017, 10:48 AM
First episode, they were about to beat up April. What do you call that?

Assault on a female? What do you call it?

CyberCubed
03-14-2017, 11:24 AM
I think it's time this thread was locked.

Jephael
03-14-2017, 12:37 PM
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I guess because you wanted them to be a certain way, that means they probably were? Even though there's not a shred of actual evidence in their source material to back that up?

[Mod Edit by Machias: Example is WAY too inappropriate... ]

neatoman
03-14-2017, 12:48 PM
First episode, they were about to beat up April. What do you call that?

Again, joke show. It looked like they were going to beat her up, but if the turtles didn't show up and given the general tone, it's more likely they were going break out a feather and tickle her.

nXpKBzFE4Mc

DarthRaphael
03-14-2017, 12:49 PM
This got way off the rails.