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

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

Even with nipples?

People would love it. "This movie revels in its own stupidity, the way ALL comic book films should know well enough to do!"

See also: Every Single Review for "Thor: Ragnarok" and "SHAZAM!"

Darkest Timeline.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Leo656

People would love it. "This movie revels in its own stupidity, the way ALL comic book films should know well enough to do!"

See also: Every Single Review for "Thor: Ragnarok" and "SHAZAM!"

Darkest Timeline.

Did Barry Allen go back in time and save his mommy? Is that why all of our CBMs suck? We're in Flashpoint?

[Leo656]

No, I think Dr. Manhattan had something to do with it. Allegedly.

[Garfield]

hmph. I think Ninja Turtles III is a good movie. with the exception of the 1990's film I think it had more heart to it than any other turtle movie. Its my second fav Ninja turtles movie next to the 1990 film. So of course I'd choose it over Out of the Shadows, Though calling Out of the Shadows a "Pile of crap" is a bit much to me. I thought it was kind of okay. I much prefer Out of the SHadows to the first Platnium Dunes movie.

[pferreira]

Originally Posted by 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.

I don't know man. I thought the sequel followed on quite nicely from the first. Sure the sequel critically speaking isn't as good as the original but not many are. On a technical level it was as good as the original and in terms of story it progressed that film universe pretty well, something III didn't bother to do. In terms of tone yeah it's very simplified and childish but in terms of story it ain't half bad.

Originally Posted by 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.

Nah, even as a child I knew it was different mutants. Didn't care though.

Originally Posted by Leo656

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

Exactly but then it's a moot point as any colourful superhero movie that actually LOOKS LIKE an actual superhero movie is not in fashion today.

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.

Agreed. Also the beginning battle with them skydiving away from that explosion is amazing to watch, a hell of a lot better technically staged than stuff in today's superhero movies. That cannot be denied.

[Leo656]

If a sequel movie changes every single thing including tone, visual style, and most of the cast, then by its very DEFINITION it is a poor follow-up to the previous film. It is barely even a "sequel" at that point, and simply a "follow-up", which is not the same thing.

III was an acceptable sequel to II. Those movies are consistent with each other. I and II have almost nothing in common, and furthermore, one of the mission statements involved in its making was to be as different from the first movie as possible.

By definition, it's a bad sequel. If you enjoy it that's fine but a sequel is supposed to be consistent with the previous movie. SotO was designed to be almost a "do-over". This is simple math.

[pferreira]

Originally Posted by Leo656

If a sequel movie changes every single thing including tone, visual style, and most of the cast, then by its very DEFINITION it is a poor follow-up to the previous film. It is barely even a "sequel" at that point, and simply a "follow-up", which is not the same thing.

(thinks it over) I don't know man. Yeah the visual style and tone was different but it didn't change so drastically that I wouldn't call it a sequel. It followed on fine and considering it's got this reputation as a comedy there's still enough serious moments and mystery to take the movie seriously. I can't say the same about the third movie which was worse in a lot of regards and applies quite well to your views on what a sequel isn't.

[ProactiveMan]

Originally Posted by Prowler

We probably do, but dunno how much we share with them.

Enough to make us mammalian tetrapods i.e. four limbed mammals. You could probably trace our genetic linage back to a common ancestor but you would have to go back a long way; before primates diverged from the rest of Mammalia, and pigs and rhinos similarly diverged.

Pigs and rhinos evolved their distinctive traits in parallel to us and ours, so it would be unlikely that we posses the genetic information to simply turn genes on that would allow us to look exactly like them. Sadly, the magic space goo from the cartoons makes way more sense than OOTS attempt at a more believable explanation.

[Wesley]

Tmnt 3 and Out of the Shadows are both decent enough films imo, though they could’ve been much better. They were still better than Secret of the Ooze anyway. I agree OotS was worse.

[IndigoErth]

That's hard to say, both have pros and cons I could argue for either of them.


Just some thoughts on both...

TMNT 3's story is better and more interesting than OotS.

TMNT 3 is a bit money grabby itself, but not as much as OotS and 2014; TMNT 3 existed at a time when film was at least partly still seen as an art form, not just largely a money maker.

Some of OotS brother interactions and issues are deeper and hold more weight across the duration of the film than TMNT 3's. TMNT 3 however has some heartfelt moments among characters (both TMNT and humans).

TMNT 3 has one of the two good movie Aprils. OotS once again looks like Megan Fox herself knows the TMNT for some reason.

Casey Casey Casey... This might be a tie. TMNT 3: No real Casey involvement, mostly just a guy that looks like his ancestor for brief portions of the films. OotS is 95% Casey in-name-only, so they're both not quite Casey, therefor that is pretty close to being an even score.

TMNT 3's time travel is almost more believable than the OotS Turtles managing to not only land on and ride on top of an airplane, but also survive it crash landing in a jungle. Not to mention Donnie someone managing to fly it sans cockpit, as if the air speed is not problem for multiple reasons.

OotS tweaked designs and lighting and decreased the amount of stuff they're wearing so they made them look a little better. TMNT 3 however lost the Henson company, the designs look worse, and adding stuff to wear via the samurai armor was a short term improvement.

Con OotS: Turtles are huge, still. (But at least no mention or use of being "bullet proof.")

Pro TMNT 3: Managing Turtle suits and horses together.

Pro OotS: Turtle truck.

Con OotS: Loony Tunes-like BS.

Con TMNT 3: Look a little puppety at times.

Con Oots: Hand animated portions of Krang fight feel hand animated and lacking weight, thus the equivalent of looking a little puppety at times.

Con TMNT 3: These Turtle suits in particular require more effort on the suspension of disbelief than previous films.

Pro OotS: Motion capture of even small movement detail lets them fit into reality pretty well, making them easier to accept as living, breathing beings.

Con OotS: Character rigging doesn't seem to account for maintaining ridged look of plastron when visible breathing (rise and fall of chest) is noticeable and looks odd.

Pro TMNT 3: Cool lair. Additional pro point for being held over from prior film and inspired by existing former subway station.

Pro OotS: Cool lair. Additional point for the addition of some real furniture, etc, suggesting some amount of improvement in their living situation.

Pro TMNT 3: Opportunity to interact with more people, and in a way that is less departmental to them since it happens in the past.

Con TMNT 3: People accept them awfully fast after getting past the initial shock.

Pro OotS: Opportunity to interact with more people, and carries more weight because it's risky to them and actions actually earn those peoples' trust and acceptance.

And whatever other pros and cons I could compare...

[pferreira]

Still one of my favourite scenes from OotS: