Has IDW TMNT Lost Its Edge?

[PizzaPower1985]

Multipart questions here...

I was perusing through my IDW TMNT back-issues and noticed that IDW started from the very beginning as a very street-level (almost Mirage-inspired????) comic book. The book had an edge. As it went on it began introducing various "cartoon" characters and through numerous art changes and story lines, seemed to get away from the edgy aspect.

When did it happen? Was it even edgy at all? Has it maintained its tone?

IF it has to be compared to any of the Mirage offshoots (cartoons, films, Archie etc.) which TMNT incarnation is it closest to? 2K3?

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Yes, it had an edge. It's used shock value pretty effectively a few times (stuff with Slash, Shredder's death, Donnie getting cracked like a damn walnut). But the TMNT's own actions haven't ever really been a surprise or shocking; just the characters around them. And after a time, I think that grows pretty tiresome.

"Oh, sure, Slash gets to curbstomp an old man in a wheelchair. But none of the Turtles have ever killed even one enemy in over 200 issues? Whatever."

My problems with IDW TMNT are twofold: the Cast, and the Limits.

1) The Limits
It's all too easy to see the lines Nick executives have drawn around the IDW sandbox. These lines can't be crossed, and it's all too obvious now where they are.

The Turtles don't kill. There's not even an attempt to make it ambiguous.

Think back to 4Kids; Leonardo decapitated the Shredder. And yes, that moment was immediately neutered with what followed. But the intent was there; Leo was straight up willing to kill an enemy. And sometimes the fight scenes would be ambiguous. Raphael enters an elevator followed by Foot soldiers; when he walks out, they're all splayed on the ground. Dead or unconscious? Well, there's no blood, but it's a cartoon... of course there's no blood. But they've never talked about "we don't kill." They've TRIED to kill. It's a compromise, but it's easy enough to tolerate.

Whereas "we don't kill" is something we see hammered home OVER and OVER and OVER with IDW TMNT. They all discuss the "Shredder Manifesto", where Mikey is super uncomfortable with the thought of killing Shredder. SHREDDER. The guy who killed THEM in Japan.

And Raphael runs off to kill Arnold Jones, and is told by Splinter, "this is a bad thing to do, Raphael. Will it improve the situation?" And Raph says no. But later events show, UM, YES, this would have been a good thing to do. Hun causes a LOT of fvcking trouble later.

And all the Turtles bail on Splinter because he kills Darius Dun, that guy who straight up promises "I swear to you, some way, some how, I will destroy you, mutant. But not before I force you to watch your precious green monsters die slow, painful, pathetic deaths." And this is presented as a TERRIBLE thing.

So then, let's ask the question we've all asked before. "What's even the fvcking point of the Turtles carrying weapons? Things made to crack skulls and cut throats and stab chests?"

2) And the Cast
For years now, the Turtles have diminished in the IDW series. They don't ever win fights on their own; they're always calling in backup. We're always being treated to Angel and Alopex and Casey. And now we're in Mutant Town, a furry festival for shippers. Oh boy, baby Turtles! And baby weasels! And pig rock girls! And missing children! It's all so fvcking CUTE.

Not to mention that we still haven't seen Null do ANYTHING in 4 years. Or that Hob and Baxter still haven't faced off in... 6 years? I'm guessing here.

To sum my points, I've lost my love of IDW TMNT. It's moving into new territory that seems aimed at bringing in audiences who are fans of Zootopia and want to see as many mutants as possible. The Turtles are barely characters in these last issues. And while "City at War" set up some really interesting new plots, like Mayor Baxter, Shredder training the Turtles, Casey losing his dad who died saving him, Splinter being DEAD, and the Turtles dealing with a new sister... we're just fvcking around in Mutant Town, drawing a bunch of new mutants, squealing over Mona Lisa getting with Donatello, cooing over Alopex and Raphael finally kissing, and worrying about mutant kids.

Which previous incarnation of TMNT would I compare it to? I wouldn't. It's thrown in elements from all the previous TMNT iterations, but now, post #100, it seems to be driving forward into a world where the Turtles are citizens of some mutant community, mutants aren't special, and character introductions and focus seems calculated for maximum PC appeal. And I'm a fvcking LIBERAL, who wants more female characters.

I'm still reading. But I don't enjoy it. And I'm very, very close to walking away for good. My thinking right now is collect up to #100 in the hardbacks. And if the ongoing story hasn't brought me back by the time that last hardback is on my bookshelf, I'm gone for good.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Sorry. That's a big damn Wall of Jericho text wall. But I had a lot to get off my chest.

[AquaParade]

I enjoyed reading that. I can't really argue with any of it. I think the on-going series is pretty good for all the restrictions placed on it, but it does grow tiresome, like you put it. We crave that sense of consequence.
I'm enjoying seeing the conclusion to Urban Legends and I'm quite excited about The Last Ronin, though. I have some optimism that The Last Ronin will let the gloves off for a few moments. This is obviously just speculation, but I wouldn't surprised to see the ninja turtle(s) take a life in that book.

[PizzaPower1985]

Besides the 1-page epilogue, Waltz's City At War did an incredible job of wrapping everything up and closing out the 100 issues. Could Sophie's Mutant Town be considered the beginning of IDW Vol. 2?

[CyberCubed]

It has edge, maybe not in post issue 100 so far, but everything leading up to it had tons of deaths.

[80gmrp]

Hmm. Personally, I do have concerns, but the only major one I seem to share is that it’s not so much about the characters we were already familiar with anymore (which includes but is not limited to the turtles).

I’ll take that a step further: there are some classic characters that still haven’t been developed much at all. My now-annoying concerns about Leatherhead aside, I know others had mixed feelings, at best, over Slash overcoming Bishop’s long-lasting mind control, only to die shortly after.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

It has edge, maybe not in post issue 100 so far, but everything leading up to it had tons of deaths.

This is true, though I can’t help but notice that some of the deceased are classic, preestablished characters, as said earlier.

[Powder]

I have never agreed with anyone more than I do right now with Cylons.

The book had some teeth at various points but largely cucked the TMNT themselves & for the last 6 or 7 issues it's felt like a Deviantart/Tumblr wet dream made for the furry shipping community.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Powder

I have never agreed with anyone more than I do right now with Cylons.

The book had some teeth at various points but largely cucked the TMNT themselves & for the last 6 or 7 issues it's felt like a Deviantart/Tumblr wet dream made for the furry shipping community.

I'm honored.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

Think back to 4Kids; Leonardo decapitated the Shredder. And yes, that moment was immediately neutered with what followed. But the intent was there; Leo was straight up willing to kill an enemy. And sometimes the fight scenes would be ambiguous. Raphael enters an elevator followed by Foot soldiers; when he walks out, they're all splayed on the ground. Dead or unconscious? Well, there's no blood, but it's a cartoon... of course there's no blood. But they've never talked about "we don't kill." They've TRIED to kill. It's a compromise, but it's easy enough to tolerate.

In season 4 Leo straight up breaks neck of some goon (in an episode about monster who can regenerate himself). It's not shown, but its pretty obvious what happens.

Also, I don't like when Turtles world is oversaturated with mutants, makes TMNT looks less special. And this whole "mutant town" thing is indeed feels like something lifted straight out of generic fanfiction or Deviantart crappy picture, about Mary Sue falling in love with one of the Turtles.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Sumac

In season 4 Leo straight up breaks neck of some goon (in an episode about monster who can regenerate himself). It's not shown, but its pretty obvious what happens.

Also, I don't like when Turtles world is oversaturated with mutants, makes TMNT looks less special. And this whole "mutant town" thing is indeed feels like something lifted straight out of generic fanfiction or Deviantart crappy picture, about Mary Sue falling in love with one of the Turtles.

Oh that's right! I knew there were other examples of legit killing in 4Kids. The episode with the mutant who used to be a servicemen who worked with Bishop... Leo and Casey on that train.

"Dragon's Brew", I think?

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

1) The Limits
It's all too easy to see the lines Nick executives have drawn around the IDW sandbox. These lines can't be crossed, and it's all too obvious now where they are.

The Turtles don't kill. There's not even an attempt to make it ambiguous.

Think back to 4Kids; Leonardo decapitated the Shredder. And yes, that moment was immediately neutered with what followed. But the intent was there; Leo was straight up willing to kill an enemy. And sometimes the fight scenes would be ambiguous. Raphael enters an elevator followed by Foot soldiers; when he walks out, they're all splayed on the ground. Dead or unconscious? Well, there's no blood, but it's a cartoon... of course there's no blood. But they've never talked about "we don't kill." They've TRIED to kill.

It's a compromise, but it's easy enough to tolerate.

Whereas "we don't kill" is something we see hammered home OVER and OVER and OVER with IDW TMNT. They all discuss the "Shredder Manifesto", where Mikey is super uncomfortable with the thought of killing Shredder. SHREDDER. The guy who killed THEM in Japan.

And Raphael runs off to kill Arnold Jones, and is told by Splinter, "this is a bad thing to do, Raphael. Will it improve the situation?" And Raph says no. But later events show, UM, YES, this would have been a good thing to do. Hun causes a LOT of fvcking trouble later.

And all the Turtles bail on Splinter because he kills Darius Dun, that guy who straight up promises "I swear to you, some way, some how, I will destroy you, mutant. But not before I force you to watch your precious green monsters die slow, painful, pathetic deaths." And this is presented as a TERRIBLE thing.

So then, let's ask the question we've all asked before. "What's even the fvcking point of the Turtles carrying weapons? Things made to crack skulls and cut throats and stab chests?"

Such great points, especially regarding 2K3 (which I can relate more deeply to having seen much more of that than IDW). There were quite a few moments in Season 1 where I was like "Huh... so that guy's probably dead" despite it not being overtly displayed. And the Turtles never once seemed overly concerned about whether or not the bad guys met a gruesome fate at their hands. "Business Is Business."

Like, you don't have to go full-blown blood-splatter as it's not necessary, but let's be real: Are they fighting to the death or are they dickin' around? Ninjas who don't kill aren't "ninjas".

It's like how certain writers and filmmakers have been taken to task about whether or not Superman or Batman would/should ever kill, and they've argued quite succinctly that the "Never, No Matter What" rule is simply a thing which was never story-driven, it was an editorial mandate based around selling toys to 5-year olds. The reality should/would be, they aspire to never kill anyone because they believe there's a better way, but if it was the only way to protect innocent people from dying then they'd be absolutely wrong to let those innocents die just because "Good Guys Don't Kill." If it's Zod or Ra's al Ghul, those "rules" go out the window because now we're talking about stopping genocide, and if you can't kill someone, or even just let someone die, "no matter what", not ever in order to prevent genocide just because you're a "Good Guy", then you're not a Good Guy.

Point being, even the purest and most noble of "good guys" shouldn't be afraid of doing the objective Right Thing just because it sets a bad example for the wee ones. I always cringe at editorial handcuffs because it's obvious that the Toy Agenda is in full swing. Like, we KNOW TMNT only exists to sell toys, but does it have to be SO obvious? The examples you point out are especially egregious and make them appear entirely impotent, something they should never be.

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

Sorry. That's a big damn Wall of Jericho text wall. But I had a lot to get off my chest.

"Walls of Jericho", eh....?



I know you're not gonna get it, CKD, that one wasn't specifically for you.
----------------

In seriousness, though... I'm sure it says something that even as someone who doesn't actively read the IDW books, but moreso reads about them and occasionally skims previews... the vibe I've gotten all along is 100% in lock with what CKD and Powder are saying.

Like, I barely know anything about the book. But when I see certain things, I'm like "Huh, this seems a lot like..." And then come to find out "Yeah, as usual, my gut's telling me the whole story without actually needing to see it in full for myself."

I'm sure it says something, but what that "something" is, I'm not entirely sure.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Point being, even the purest and most noble of "good guys" shouldn't be afraid of doing the objective Right Thing just because it sets a bad example for the wee ones. I always cringe at editorial handcuffs because it's obvious that the Toy Agenda is in full swing. Like, we KNOW TMNT only exists to sell toys, but does it have to be SO obvious? The examples you point out are especially egregious and make them appear entirely impotent, something they should never be.

I quoted the Darius Dun threats verbatim; went and dug out my hardback collection to write it down.

Because it's the most cold, calculated threat ever. And all four Turtles are all "WHAT!? HOW COULD YOU KILL HIM, DAD!?"

Dumbasses.

Originally Posted by Leo656

"Walls of Jericho", eh....?
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/AnotherBla...restricted.gif


I know you're not gonna get it, CKD, that one wasn't specifically for you.

Dude, that's Chris Fvcking Jericho and he's awesome. You don't know me; you don't know my life. Crank up that Fozzy!

[Leo656]

I forgot you like Fozzy, I simply remembered you don't follow wrestling.

Nice guy. Loved that I used to use "God Pounds His Nails" as my entrance theme! That was a relief.

[TigerClaw]

I love where the IDW comic is at with the whole Mutant Town thing. I'm into the more fantastical elements.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

It's moving into new territory that seems aimed at bringing in audiences who are fans of Zootopia and want to see as many mutants as possible. The Turtles are barely characters in these last issues. And while "City at War" set up some really interesting new plots, like Mayor Baxter, Shredder training the Turtles, Casey losing his dad who died saving him, Splinter being DEAD, and the Turtles dealing with a new sister... we're just fvcking around in Mutant Town, drawing a bunch of new mutants, squealing over Mona Lisa getting with Donatello, cooing over Alopex and Raphael finally kissing, and worrying about mutant kids.

...Relevant.

[Galactus]

I'm not sure IDW had much of an edge to lose. That is not necessarily a knock but these turtles were always much more responsible with their no killing rule and Leo beating himself up because he thought he killed Slash while defending his family.

I think right now Sophie is playing to her strengths as an artist. Clearly she is very skilled at drawing anthropomorphic animal characters and slice of life stories which is what we've gotten since she took over but I'm sure more is coming. I suspect it will read better in trade when you can whole picture in one sitting as opposed to waiting a whole month just to see whether the turtles enjoyed their metal concert.

[PizzaPower1985]

Originally Posted by Leo656

It's like how certain writers and filmmakers have been taken to task about whether or not Superman or Batman would/should ever kill, and they've argued quite succinctly that the "Never, No Matter What" rule is simply a thing which was never story-driven, it was an editorial mandate based around selling toys to 5-year olds. The reality should/would be, they aspire to never kill anyone because they believe there's a better way, but if it was the only way to protect innocent people from dying then they'd be absolutely wrong to let those innocents die just because "Good Guys Don't Kill." If it's Zod or Ra's al Ghul, those "rules" go out the window because now we're talking about stopping genocide, and if you can't kill someone, or even just let someone die, "no matter what", not ever in order to prevent genocide just because you're a "Good Guy", then you're not a Good Guy.

Point being, even the purest and most noble of "good guys" shouldn't be afraid of doing the objective Right Thing just because it sets a bad example for the wee ones.

YOU NEED TO E-MAIL MARK WAID RIGHT F****** NOW and tell him this $hit! Dude still can't let Man of Steel go.

[Leo656]

Unless it's "Flash", Mark Waid can take his Super-Friends jammies and go soak his head. He's a 60-something year old man who takes his character and writing sensibilities from bad cartoons he watched when he was 5. Nothing he has to say about anything at all is relevant.

"Kingdom Come" was all about Alex Ross with Waid merely tagging along, and the fact that "The Kingdom" is a pretty weak follow-up more or less proves that conclusively. When not paired with some outstanding art, Waid's writing shines through as merely "adequate" and very often ham-fisted. And legend has it that Ross had more to do with scripting KC than Waid did in the first place. Although "Superman quitting to go pout on his VR Farm and being perfectly willing to let the world go to hell without him, all because he doesn't like killing bad guys" is definitely, definitely some Waid bullsh*t. "I'd rather let MILLIONS of people die through my inaction, than even kill ONE super-villain who deserved it." Some f*cking "hero". That story really didn't treat my man well at ALL until the second act kicked in.

"Superman: Birthright" was terrible, easily the worst Superman origin story (ignoring anything and everything New 52-related, as any sane person should do).

The very definition of a "manchild". He's literally 60-something-going on-6. Standing up in a crowded movie theater and screaming bloody murder at the screen because your favorite cartoon character killed Space Hitler. And he tells that story like he's proud, as if it doesn't make him a goddamn lunatic. I'd have pelted him with my drink.

I mean, the fact that as a grown man he gushes un-ironically over goddamn SUPER-FRIENDS... not even the "pretty good by 80s cartoon standards", late-series "Super-Powers: Galactic Guardians" rebranding, but the universally-known-and-accepted-to-be-sh*tty SUPER-FRIENDS... tells you absolutely everything you need to know about him. I liked it as a kid, too, but at some point I stopped dropping sh*t in my drawers and gained a sense of taste and perspective, and moved on to better things. Pity that he never has.

I've often wondered how he can be so, so good at Flash... maybe The Best at Flash... and so pitifully brick-stupid and just plain wrong about absolutely everything else.

But yeah, f*ck Mark Waid.

[PizzaPower1985]

One thing about this series though, edge or lack-thereof, is THE ART! IDW couldn't be bothered or couldn't afford to hire a classical comic book cartoonist in the vein of Jim Aparo, John Byrne etc. Instead every artist on this series is of the sketchy, abstract or "underground" variety. TMNT lacks the polish of a 70's or 80's Marvel book (IT ALWAYS HAS AS IT'S HISTORICALLY UNDERGROUND).

There is a middle ground though, right? I mean there has to be an underground polished artist in the vein of Peter Laird or hell, we could even settle for a Carl Barks type funny animal artist... but no! IDW TMNT always features artists that ape the 2012 show, try to do "THEIR VERSION" of Mirage or just draw cutesy cuddly teddy bear turtles.

WHY DID THAT HAPPEN? Why did KEN GARING come on board at issue 51 and NOT GET BRIEFCASES OF MONEY THROWN AT HIM? HIS TURTLES LOOKED LIKE MIRAGE. HIS TURTLES HAD AN EDGE. HIS TURTLES MADE ME THINK OF 1990 MOVIE TMNT AGAIN!

Why can TMNT NEVER be drawn like a 1980s MARVEL OR DC BOOK? Do those artists no longer exist? Have they all died? Somebody get Walt Simonson on the telephone.