Can the TMNT brand survive a "bad" Turtles movie?

[victory_angel]

Well it depends on the movie. If it's good then yeah it will add fuel to the ninja turtle hype.

If it's bad like we fear it will be...odds are those outside the fandom or just getting into the fandom would be turned off by it. But everyone else will just shrug their shoulders and say "That's not Ninja Turtles."

[Xav]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

Spiderman 3 ruined the original Spiderman trilogy, eventually leading to the films to be rebooted.

Critics disliking Spider-Man 3 had nothing to do with the films being rebooted. It was because Sam Rami couldn't meet the deadline for a fourth.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by Xav

Critics disliking Spider-Man 3 had nothing to do with the films being rebooted. It was because Sam Rami couldn't meet the deadline for a fourth.

You can blame Sony for that, They wanted another Spider-Man movie as soon as possible, They have to continue making those movies in order to still have the rights.

[Casey]

Also, I disagree with every option on the poll haha. And they say pretty much the same things. Where is the "No it cannot. It will kill the franchise." Option?

[Prowler]

TMNT isn't taken very seriously by mainstream media and the audience in general compared to the likes of Spider-Man and Batman, I'm afraid. So maybe it can survive a terrible movie? Who knows.

[Wildcat]

Originally Posted by Cipher

II and III. Arguably more.

So now we're counting Secret of the Ooze as a bad movie? Yeah right...its more lighthearted but its not bad.

TMNT was not a bad movie either...just wasn't that grand of a theatrical release. Seems like it would of fit better as direct-to-video or a TV special.

Part 3 was the only bad movie. NM, Turtle Tunes and such don't count. They were not movies.

[TurtleTitan97]

Originally Posted by Jester

Is it sad I just noticed that those are essentially all Leo just photoshopped to look like his brothers? Except maybe Donnie.

You're not alone.

Anyway, in regards to the question, yes. If this franchise can make it past stuff like TMNT 3, it can make it past another. Plus other franchises have made it past bad movies. (Transformers, Avatar, Dragon Ball, etc.)

[victory_angel]

Given the number of years between Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Movie 3 and TMNT the CGI movie. It would have been better if the CGI movie had been a reboot and not a supposed continuation of the original film Trilogy.

The one really bad thing about that it expected the people who came to see it to be familiar with the TMNT mythos. Anyone one else who went to see it in theaters because it was a CGI film wouldn't have any idea who these characters were or why they were mutant turtles who lived with a mutant rat.

[Casey]

Originally Posted by victory_angel

Given the number of years between Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Movie 3 and TMNT the CGI movie. It would have been better if the CGI movie had been a reboot and not a supposed continuation of the original film Trilogy.

The one really bad thing about that it expected the people who came to see it to be familiar with the TMNT mythos. Anyone one else who went to see it in theaters because it was a CGI film wouldn't have any idea who these characters were or why they were mutant turtles who lived with a mutant rat.

It really confused me when I found out they were keeping it in the series canon. I get that they didn't want another Shredder film, so it was easier to put them in a universe where he was already gone, but it was a weird choice.

[Garfield]

I don't think TMNT is taken seriously enough by the mainstream to be really hurt by a bad movie.

I just don't think beyond the fans and children, that people every really thought that any of the movies were anything beyond, a silly fun children's cartoon brought to the big screen.

You show them TMNT, TMNT Secret of the Ooze, TMNT III and they see products of similar quality.

I also think people...sometimes tend to blow the effect of some bad movies and its effect on franchises out of proportion...just sometimes.

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by Wildcat

So now we're counting Secret of the Ooze as a bad movie? Yeah right...its more lighthearted but its not bad.

It is a bad movie. If you think it is anything other than a bad movie, it is because of nostalgic attachment.

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by Cipher

It is a bad movie. If you think it is anything other than a bad movie, it is because of nostalgic attachment.

Are you comparing the TMNT movies to, "real" movies? Compared to other comic book movies, none of the Turtle movies have much depth, but they're good for what they are.

But I realize my opinion is bias as a TMNT fan, but I still wouldn't compare them to the best DC or Marvel films.

[sdp]

A movie can rarely kill a franchise. Batman was well and alive after Batman and Robin, we got plenty of Batman stuff, the only thing the movie killed was future movies, and it was for the best, since we got the awesome BBegins instead of more wacky villains or more of Burton's take. Superman is more of a change in times and hard having him relate to the current generation, not so much that the fourth movie killed the franchise. X-Men was well and alive after X3, in fact the only reason the movie franchise even took a very small break was because X3 was an ending to the film franchise similar to The Dark Knight Rises. Green Lantern is a special case because he's never been a mainstream superhero that people really know, the movies job was supposed to get people into GL in a similar way that Iron Man, no one outside of fans knew who IM was and now he's one of Marvels biggest heroes alongside Spider-Man and Wolverine. So yeah the movie did kill any chances of GL becoming big but it didn't kill the franchise, he's doing what he was doing before the movie. Spider-Man 4 was going to happen but it had to do more with differences between the director and the studio, but SM3 didn't kill the franchise, though it did hurt the chances of continuing that continuity after the director left.

So the answer is no, it cannot kill the franchise at all. But the bigger question is, can it kill the TMNT movie franchise? And we all know that's a yes. TMNT III killed the chances of more movies, which is why IV was stuck in development hell, they needed something new which is why we got all the crazy ideas of the fourth turtle or extra mutations, they didn't want another bomb but the fad dying at the same time didn't help. The 2007 movie didn't go as unnoticed as people thought but people just weren't interested since it was CG and people saw it for "kid" only and kids didn't care for the turtles. Of course it actually did decently but not enough to get a sure sequel, in fact it only killed the chances of another CG movie but laird was still selling the idea of another movie and we probably would've gotten a new movie by now with actors had the franchise not been sold. Now if this movie is bad it'll kill any chance of movies for a few years, but it'll be revisited eventually and have no effect on current TMNT stuff.

Many of the examples in the OP are movies considered bad by the internet but not necessarily by the average casual fan and all the "bad" movies that made a lot of money continued the franchises like X-Men, spider-Man etc. Just look at Transformers, who doesn't hate and piss on the movie franchise and yet we're on the fourth movie going strong. TMNT can be a bad movie and make a lot of money and the movie franchise will continue.

[Wildcat]

Originally Posted by Cipher

It is a bad movie. If you think it is anything other than a bad movie, it is because of nostalgic attachment.

How so? I really wanna know cause this is the first time I see it included with Part 3.

Secret of the Ooze was more lighthearted like I said and had a more OT feel but that didnt mean it was bad. They just changed the tone.

My only complaint is the way Super Shredder died. Doesn't make sense and it was a missed opportunity for a more memorable ending.

[Ninjinister]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

Can the TMNT brand survive a "bad" Turtles movie?

If it can survive you, it can survive anything.

[turtlefanforever]

But I would say yes it can certainly survive a bad film. It will damage bays company reputation and that of the director and cash far more than the franchise.

[gutterpunk13]

Maybe its been a while since I've seen TMNT3 and I agree it wasn't great or on par with the other turtles movies but was it really that bad? Honestly?

Sure it had time traveling and made Casey Jones a glorified baby sitter, but I don't remember anything that would make me consider it to be a "bad" movie.

Anyway, back to topic. I think if it bombs the franchise will be as it was before but it will kill any chance of another movie for the next five years or so. Which sucks, however I don't know whether I want it to be a hit or not. If it is a hit but its a terrible representation of what the turtles really are then the next movies will be more of the same. If it fails that means we won't get another movie for a long,long, time. But when they finally do make one there is a chance it could be much closer to the source material. Hopefully I'm wrong.

I dunno does that make any sense?

[turtlefanforever]

It can survive anything !!!!

[Jester]

Oh, you...you're so witty.

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by gutterpunk13

Maybe its been a while since I've seen TMNT3 and I agree it wasn't great or on par with the other turtles movies but was it really that bad? Honestly?

Sure it had time traveling and made Casey Jones a glorified baby sitter, but I don't remember anything that would make me consider it to be a "bad" movie.

People mostly rag on III for the costumes being inferior to the first two movies. Aside from that and a few lame jokes, the movie wasn't bad at all.