TMNT III or Out of the Shadows, which is the bigger pile of crap?

[DarkFell]

I think that despite the cheese, TMNT 3 had a story plot in there somewhere.

I still haven't had the desire to buy OOTS, or even the first BayTurtles movie.

[Leo656]

Me neither, and they're positively clogging up every $5 bin I see.

Not worth it. I can buy a chicken caesar wrap for that and still have change left over.

[Andrew NDB]

Buy? I still haven't even watched OotS yet, with no plans existing ever to do so.

I'll watch it if someone wants to pay me to probably spit bile over it for an hour and a half.

[snake]

Is is even a goddamned question? I’d watch TMNT3 100 times in a row before touching OOTS again.

[neatoman]

I refuse to buy OotS. I only bought the first PD movie on DVD to get a discount on 9 movies I actually wanted when a local video rental went out of business, but I would not do the same for OotS.

[Redeemer]

TMNT II should be in this discussion... it is by far a worse movie than TMNT III

[Voltron]

Oh, man. You and I are going to have to disagree, there. TMNT II wasn't anywhere near as good as the original, but it's also no where near as bad as III.

I'm voting for OotS, because I found the characterization in it lacking. The Turtles need to have their personalities shine through better. They're so wonderfully deep and nuanced. Everyone has their favorite, and I feel that a lot of that has to do with the personality they exude.

Bay missed the mark on that. He basically just switched out the Transformers for the TMNT. They're waaaay too big and weird looking, too. Too much was happening in the design. It's distracting.

III was crap, yes, but it still preserved the charm of the guys.

[Andrew NDB]

II was the mortal wound to the film franchise. III was the bullet to the brain, the mercy kill. Everything after is experiments in suck.

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

II was the mortal wound to the film franchise.

Do you think things could have gone differently if "Ninja Rap" was never born?

[pferreira]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Did you seriously just imply there's anything good about "Batman & Robin"?

C'mon. COME ON.

I tell you something. When I first watched the film I couldn't even make it all the way through. It was just too much excess of everything and nothing exciting or interesting about it. However some years back I caught a bit of the movie and I realised that in five or ten minute doses the film isn't that bad, it's just watching the whole thing feels very uninspiring and excessive. There are good moments in Batman & Robin but not enough. I also can't ignore that the film is competently made in terms of production. The visual effects are high quality, shame about the script.

Originally Posted by oldmanwinters

Do you think things could have gone differently if "Ninja Rap" was never born?

Is the film only known just for that scene??? I mean that's not the only thing that comes to mind when I remember the sequel.

Originally Posted by Redeemer

TMNT II should be in this discussion... it is by far a worse movie than TMNT III

[Leo656]

I've only ever even SEEN "Batman & Robin" in 5/10-minute doses - by now I'm sure I've seen the entire thing, though, just out of order - and it's STILL one of the 5 Worst Movies I've Ever Seen. "Meet The Feebles" ranks higher. "Teenage Catgirls In Heat", though, I'd have to get back to you on.

Originally Posted by pferreira

Is the film only known just for that scene??? I mean that's not the only thing that comes to mind when I remember the sequel.

For 99% of people, yes.

Find a random person on the street, ask them if they've seen TMNT II, and if they have, they'll either bust out the "Ninja Rap", yell "COMBAT COLDCUTS!", OR, bungle the "Traditional Pre-Fight Donuts" line.

That's all anyone remembers from SotO.

[pferreira]

Originally Posted by Leo656

I've only ever even SEEN "Batman & Robin" in 5/10-minute doses - by now I'm sure I've seen the entire thing, though, just out of order - and it's STILL one of the 5 Worst Movies I've Ever Seen.

I mean I can't really argue the effects are bad. It has some nice moments as well. There are many worse films for me you'd have to pay me to rewatch five minutes of.

Originally Posted by Leo656

Find a random person on the street, ask them if they've seen TMNT II, and if they have, they'll either bust out the "Ninja Rap", yell "COMBAT COLDCUTS!", OR, bungle the "Traditional Pre-Fight Donuts" line.

That's all anyone remembers from SotO.

I remember the film really well, I guess because I enjoyed it. Watched it tons as a kid. Still a fun movie for me on rewatch.

[Leo656]

I've seen it hundreds of times but even as a kid I recall feeling a tremendous sense of letdown. Because ain't no way anyone can argue that it's a good follow-up to the first movie. An "acceptable" kids movie in and of itself if you pretend the 1990 film never happened? Fair enough. But going from TMNT 1990 into "Secret of the Ooze" is like listening to Metallica's "Load" record right after listening to "Kill 'Em All". They don't fit together and have NOTHING in common, even if they're supposedly in the same universe. And I actually like "Load" quite a lot, but I fully confess that it sounds a lot better if you pretend a different band recorded it.

I wanted more of what I got in the first movie. I still want that. I'm never, ever going to get that, and I haaaaaaaaaate that fact more than I hate goddamn disco.

So yeah, even to 9-year-old me, Part II was a misfire. It literally only "works" if you ignore the far-superior prequel, and WHY would anyone do that? Why would ANYONE say, "Y'know, to hell with your filet mignon, I think I'd rather eat a Sack O'Ten from White Castle and spend the next three days sh*tting blood." Who DOES that?

[FredWolfLeonardo]

If most kids were able to pretend that Razhar and Tokka were a Pig and a Rhino, I'm sure they were able to enjoy SoTo just as much as the first film.

[Leo656]

Kids, perhaps. Kids also eat boogers and forget to not poop themselves.

Nobody should let what kids enjoy be any kind of objective standard of quality, and that really should go without saying.

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by pferreira

I tell you something. When I first watched the film I couldn't even make it all the way through. It was just too much excess of everything and nothing exciting or interesting about it. However some years back I caught a bit of the movie and I realised that in five or ten minute doses the film isn't that bad, it's just watching the whole thing feels very uninspiring and excessive. There are good moments in Batman & Robin but not enough.

The Alfred sub-plot and Dick and Bruce's rift is great, and the third act ain't too bad. Also, again, great soundtrack. It could probably fare better today in a world resistant to Zack Snyder and very accepting of risk free quip-before-edge Marvel movies.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

TMNT III. Why?

Because it belonged to a movie series that showed so much promise at the start, and only got worse. Every time I see anything from SOTO or III, I think "this is supposed to be the same universe as TMNT 1990?" then I get mildly sad

OTTS was objectively worse as a film, but it was the sequel to an equally terrible first film,so the quality didn't decrease or increase, it stayed the same

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

The Alfred sub-plot and Dick and Bruce's rift is great, and the third act ain't too bad. Also, again, great soundtrack. It could probably fare better today in a world resistant to Zack Snyder and very accepting of risk free quip-before-edge Marvel movies.

If "Batman and Robin" came out tomorrow exactly as it is it would make $2.4 billion dollars.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Leo656

If "Batman and Robin" came out tomorrow exactly as it is it would make $2.4 billion dollars.

Even with nipples?

[CyberCubed]

TMNT III is basically "Citizen Kane" compared to Michael Bay's nostril Turtle movies.