Another movie from Platinum Dunes in the works - new writer hired

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Papenbrook

Okay, you know what. Fine.

How come it's not "pandering/filling a quota" when rich, well-known companies hire (primarily) white men for mainstream franchises/ movies? How come it's not "catering" when studios/businesses promote (mainly) white men to positions of power/influence?

I don't understand how you can't look past your own point of view.

Until you feel the constant sting of being passed over and discriminated against for your gender/race/sexuality/etc., you won't understand.

We can't kid ourselves. They are going to hire whoever will be the most profitable for them, at the end of the day. I know people are up in arms about women's rights, and that's great, but in my mind, the only thing these executives are truly discriminating against is their movie flopping.
Don't think that there is an eligible women out there that they won't hire, just because they think women are stinky and gross.

[IndigoErth]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

We can't kid ourselves. They are going to hire whoever will be the most profitable for them, at the end of the day. I know people are up in arms about women's rights, and that's great, but in my mind, the only thing these executives are truly discriminating against is their movie flopping.
Don't think that there is an eligible women out there that they won't hire, just because they think women are stinky and gross.

Bay films... They seem to think a woman's "place" in film is Fox sticking her ass in the camera. (And whatever the hell that was in OotS.)

Can we maybe skip that kind of nonsense this time?

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by Wildcat

This makes me happy. Not because I loved the last 2 but because we’re getting another movie and because people are probably gonna lose their minds again. There’s already 5 pages here.

Honestly 5 (currently 7) pages seems pretty low.

We were told that that current movie series was done and assumed that we'd never deal with Platinum Dunes again, we also thought that it would be quite some time before a reboot so this is pretty big news that I thought would get more conversation than it has.

It kinda reminds me of Out Of The Shadows itself. In hindsight it shouldn't be a surprise that it flopped, I recall the views of the trailers being much lower than the 2014 movie, it seemed like people were uninterested.

Even though the general thinking is that Platinum Dunes producing again is a bad thing it isn't even engendering any real rage anywhere online. Maybe that's a sign that they should wait and give people a chance to miss the turtles. Either that or maybe when we first see actual tangible things interest will pick up like it seems to be doing with Bumblebee but we'll see.

Originally Posted by Krutch

As far as my expectations for this movie goes... I don't know. Way too early to tell but if I had to guess, they'll push more into a kiddie direction than trying to adapt anything that's come before it.

Take Rise of the TMNT for example. Familiar, but different, and not trying to be a retread of anything else.

What exactly do we mean by "kiddie direction"? If we're talking about teenagers then that would land were most comic book movies aim for and I'd have little problem with it.

If we're talking about little kids twelve and under, well Megan Fox's wardrobe and dick jokes aside that's who Out Of The Shadows was mostly aimed at. I read the marketing for OOTS was aimed mostly at pre-teens as opposed to the 2014 movie which was more at people in their teens and early twenties. I would hope Paramount and Platinum Dunes have learned a lesson there but as I've pointed out they have a history of taking the wrong lessons from things.

As for doing the same thing but different, I tend to think that the one thing that separates TMNT from other mass merchandising properties of that era is that it was not invented to be a mass merchandising property.

Transformers, Power Rangers, Pokemon even Masters of the Universe all have it baked into their concept to regenerate into new versions. TMNT doesn't have that - the story begins and ends with the core characters and to some degree every version has to tell the same story.

Sure, you can take them in new toyetic directions but has it ever worked? Just look at every attempt to replace Shredder as their primary antagonist in Lord Dregg, Dragonlord and now Baron Draxum in the upcoming show it's not that these are bad characters, it's that it doesn't quite fit for these to be a core part of TMNT. An episode or even an arc of show where they fight an alien trying to con the public he's a benevolent savior is fine, an entire series based on that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Same goes with the turtles in the future and the turtles in TRON world.

This is not to say that Shredder and the Foot should be their only enemies and that street level is all TMNT should play with but all their better received stories and characters either thematically match up with the turtles in some way or connected to their core narrative. Karai is part of the Foot, Hun has a bitter history with Casey, Bishop wants the mutagen in their blood and so on.

would you prefer a competant female director for hire or a director who is a white, male, and fan of the property?

This maybe a controversial thing to say but TMNT doesn't necessarily need a fan (white male or otherwise) to direct their movies. Steve Barron hadn't even heard of the property but he looked at the comic and got it.

There's little consensus among fans what TMNT should be and even more disparity with what will work for a general audience. A director needs to get the property and respectful of the fans but be detached enough from both to make something a broad appeal. That's not going to be easy. For a long time it was assumed that what the general audience wanted was Fred Wolf in live action but it turns out not as many people wanted that as everyone assumed.

Originally Posted by Leolead

I don't see them ever going back to suits. There's really no reason to when Mocap has evolved to a point where it's so much easier and less expensive than building realistic Turtle suits.

True. Hollywood is very invested in motion capture although one reason they may not is the cost.

Unless they simply tweak the existing 3D models - which would be weird given this is supposed to be a reboot then coming up new ones from scratch would be extremely expensive and probably result in another human centric movie at least to start with.

I'm sure it would be less expensive to have rubber suits with cgi to animate the faces and correct for when the suits look rubbery. Frankly after the last movie tanked I can't see Paramount throwing anywhere near the same money they did at either of the PD movies. Then again we're talking about another TMNT movie produced by the same guys that tanked the previous one. I'm starting to think that PD is made up of the most persuasive people on the planet either that or they marched into Paramount offices with a swinging pocket watch and recited the phrase "you are getting very sleepy" multiple times.

[AlessandraDC]

Originally Posted by Original TMNT Cartoon Fan

Do you also want female turtles?

haha please no

As far as which directors, I don't know, but there are several female film-makers involved with upcoming DC and Marvel movies!

[Leolead]

Anyway, Variety confirmed that it's going to be a reboot
https://variety.com/2018/film/news/p...es-1202852427/

The studio is aiming to reboot the franchise through the third “Ninja Turtles” project.

[Donaterro]

I am, very cautious. I want to be optimistic but until I see.

1. A concerted effort to find a darker tone, even if slightly so.
2. A complete re-design of the characters so they look less hideous and they're smaller so it actually makes sense that they can be stealthy.
3. Oh and actual Ninja action, martial arts, moving away from the foot just being bad guys with guns.
4. And Michael Bay farrrrrrrrrr away from it, yeah that's not happening.

Just give me a Nolan TMNT movie. TMNT Begins, let's goooooo!

There is a thirst for a darker TMNT, I know if they made one based on the original comics (more so than the 1990 flick) and gave us some blood, perhaps even some foot ninja limbs here and there they could really make a mark on the comic book movie scene.

But they're likely going to aim it at kids again. And screw it up, somehow.

Maybe the 1990 movie is the best one we'll ever get, it struck such a good balance between darkness, emotion, and comedy.

We could get a better movie one day, I just don't have faith Mr. Bay is the one to do it.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by IndigoErth

Bay films... They seem to think a woman's "place" in film is Fox sticking her ass in the camera. (And whatever the hell that was in OotS.)

Can we maybe skip that kind of nonsense this time?

True. I can’t stand the blatant sexual pandering.

[newfan]

Originally Posted by sdp

What if it's inspired by Rise?

Turtles have magical weapons.
Black April.
Raph is leader.

The leader swap ...Oh Hell no!
With Rise being younger and something different I've just detached a little and kinda see it as it is, but not other versions. (given the timing though it is around the time of the new series)
I wonder how long it is likely to be before we hear anything else at all about it.

[Wildcat]

@ Galactus, I agree it’s very surprising that another is being made by PD. I haven’t seen rage but I’m sure at least this place will light up again. It has a tiny bit already.

I’m glad it’s supposed to be a reboot. I know some people have absolutely no confidence this new movie will be any better (assuming it doesn’t get canceled) but as surprising as it is it really can’t be any worse than the last 2. To be the same or worse would have to be done on purpose.

It might not be the best TMNT movie but it’s bound to better and more in line with what we’d like. That along with new writers and director is why I’m excited.

[bwwd]

Cant believe You guys took the feminist bait and keep goin
I think they will make turtles bulletproof again and all that stuff again so its not really martial art but weapons and guns themed movie, they feel the urge to modernize it which means turn knife into homming missile and turn shurikens into grenades etc.. they just dont get it at all, they want to please everyone at the same time by changing too much, they did it with street fighter movies, typical masked goons with guns as enemies wow action film.
They have contracts to do these kind of movies where theyrent weapons for lower prices and movie business keeps spinning, they all know each other and writing movies in such way that their friend will get to have their properties - guns/cars whatever used in movie , its all made for money and they just dont care movies come,movies go... and they reboot after couple of years, they will keep doing it again and again renting their friends stuff for their movies to profit from eveything they can.Thats why many action movies look kinda the same with generic bad guys.

[IndigoErth]

Originally Posted by Galactus

Unless they simply tweak the existing 3D models - which would be weird given this is supposed to be a reboot then coming up new ones from scratch would be extremely expensive and probably result in another human centric movie at least to start with.

Good point, sadly. What is this studio's history of suits + cgi? Anyone know if there is anything?


....

The PD set may not be the cutest in the world and the first looks of 2014 stupidly did not set a good impression, but I've seen images of some pretty unappealing looking comic art as well, so they're hardly alone. They'd never win any magazine covers for hottest mutant bachelors, but I also really doubt they'd win for absolute worst looking if everything of them to come out of the franchise was judged equally together.

People may have been put off by their looks and maybe some avoided it for that reason, but it wasn't what made the films themselves bad. The better use of lighting and whatnot of OotS was at least a lot more flattering. (Imo.)

That said, if they were still going to go strictly CGI, to save time and cost and keep it away from becoming a human centered movie once again, these guys aren't necessarily entirely unsalvageable. I wouldn't go so drastic on editing the models that it would make it off putting again, this time by being half recognizable and half not, but at least finding a happy medium by scaling them down to maybe no taller than the average man (say 5'10 at most for Donnie and less for the others - still taller than norm, okay, but take the 'teen' part off and lets say they've reached their adult heights) and letting up on the steroids a bit so they look like they're capable of being more agile would help. Being well muscled is okay, but eesh... there's a limit between looking strong and looking like green brick walls that should hardly be able to move.

Facially... I wouldn't do anything more to Leo and Donnie than thin out the lips. Though personally I'd tweak Raph and Mikey to look a bit more like the other two. Maybe not too jarringly drastic, but enough. And don't forget the flattering lighting, etc. Please.

Minimalist attire, fine. Leo looked great having cut back; Raph was fine. Lose the sweatshirt tired around Mikey's waist that he can never even wear, and Donnie still needs to lose all the tech he's wearing 24/7. If he needs some of it at some point, fine, but they should be allowed to take this stuff off sometimes! (That includes even wearing their weapons and weapon straps, etc at home.)

edit: And if they're going to have it, then make them use it. What was the point of the CB radios they never touched? (They could have at least used them to communicate with the cops once they made friends!) Not to mention most of Donnie's tech and Leo's throwing knives I'd have like to see him do more with than just wear.


And for the love of god, cut down on some of the bulk of the shells. I've said it before and I'll say it again... they're originally little sliders, not galapagos. I never liked how absurdly high they made it come up above the shoulder and had hoped OotS would improved on that. I get that maybe the thinking was that it protects the back of the neck/head, but given their lives it would be a serious weak point if they can't see over their shoulder and what's behind them.

(edit: Sorry, Cubed, the nostrils stay.)


More edits: I STILL have this concept art (in spoiler) from 2014 (upper body of it) as my desktop background... I could see going back to those kind of proportions before someone yelled "bigger!" (But still change the shell closer to shoulder height, please.)

Spoiler:

This film news does make me curious about them showing up in Ready Player One. I'm largely leaning toward assuming that film just needed filler and they were readily available models. At the same time, from the sound of it, they're up front enough that it's obvious (I guess? I haven't see it) that it's them, rather than just being put somewhat in the background... So maybe they're not yet ready to put these guys aside and possibly paid attention to reaction to them having a cameo.

[newfan]

Actually talk of the designs came up very recently (not on here) and it is surprising that slight adjustments can make a lot of difference (PD Mikey was used as the example)
They could easily tweek and tone down a bit..... or of course they could go all out and end up with something worse Hopefully not..
I've said before, GCI itself isn't the issue here.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Most of us are clamoring for a comics-inspired TMNT movie... let's try to take a step back and look at it from the perspectives of a general audience and the filmmakers themselves.

Is nostalgia (i.e. Fred Wolf pizza-loving cartoons) more or less powerful--or financially viable--than the current CBM model typified by Marvel, DC, and Fox/Sony?

Is the idea of a more faithful (i.e. "dark 'n' gritty") TMNT portrayal going to sell tickets and investors? Or do the filmmakers and Viacom opt for toy sales alone?

If parents will take their kids to see Justice League, X-Men Apocalypse, Deadpool, Infinity War... are they more or less likely to take their kids to an older-skewing TMNT movie?

How does the Transformers film series business model compare to the Marvel/DC business model? Favorably or less favorably? And is that financially, box office, toy sales, or just cost of production?

I'd like to think the answers come out in favor of comics-inspired TMNT films. And I think the fact that the more Fred Wolf inspired film (the sequel) did much worse than the initial film (when more people were fooled or fooled themselves) helps support my optimism.

[Candy Kappa]

I don't think OotS did poorly because of the FW elements, but that the majority of the viewers of the first one was so put off with what they saw that they just didn't comer back for the sequel.

If a FW movie was made ala Ragnarok or GotG instead of Transformers 2 I think it would print money.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Candy Kappa

I don't think OotS did poorly because of the FW elements, but that the majority of the viewers of the first one was so put off with what they saw that they just didn't comer back for the sequel.

If a FW movie was made ala Ragnarok or GotG instead of Transformers 2 I think it would print money.

I wasn't saying OotS did poorly because of the Fred Wolf elements, I'm saying that comparatively, a movie that DID double down on those elements did worse than their previous entry. That's not a direct causation, but I think it's still a red flag that the people signing the checks will notice and, perhaps, be more cautious about.

But the biggest comparative business analysis that can and should be done is following the Marvel model than the Transformers model. Except the Marvel model takes more work and effort (and interest).

[IndigoErth]

Yeah, I think disappointment in the first hurt OotS more than it would have had 2016 itself been the first and could have been judged on it's own merit.


And agree on comparing it more to the likes of Marvel, etc. Transformers even being what it is is more forgiving to being used to create a giant explosive spectacle that earns money because of it. It works for that. They shouldn't however assume the Turtles can be used in the same way. They require (and deserve) the depth and attention to detail that some other good comic films have received.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

Most of us are clamoring for a comics-inspired TMNT movie... let's try to take a step back and look at it from the perspectives of a general audience and the filmmakers themselves.

Is nostalgia (i.e. Fred Wolf pizza-loving cartoons) more or less powerful--or financially viable--than the current CBM model typified by Marvel, DC, and Fox/Sony?

Is the idea of a more faithful (i.e. "dark 'n' gritty") TMNT portrayal going to sell tickets and investors? Or do the filmmakers and Viacom opt for toy sales alone?

If parents will take their kids to see Justice League, X-Men Apocalypse, Deadpool, Infinity War... are they more or less likely to take their kids to an older-skewing TMNT movie?

How does the Transformers film series business model compare to the Marvel/DC business model? Favorably or less favorably? And is that financially, box office, toy sales, or just cost of production?

I'd like to think the answers come out in favor of comics-inspired TMNT films. And I think the fact that the more Fred Wolf inspired film (the sequel) did much worse than the initial film (when more people were fooled or fooled themselves) helps support my optimism.

I'd say that's pretty sound reasoning. Although a lot of this still held true even before the 2014 movie came out. That and the sequel hadn't shown a downhill trend yet though, so those points are definitely worth noting.

At this point, pretty much every other comic book-themed property is skewing towards teens and/or adults, as well as children, other than TMNT. Even The Incredibles 2, which on the surface looks like a children's movie, ends up being a movie that doesn't feel the need to pander to six year olds. And look at the success most of these movies are having. People in my age group (I'm nearly 30) love comic book movies, love adult content, and have fond memories of the TMNT. Get a clue, Platinum.

Just goes to show how clueless the guys in charge have been. But yeah, I'm staying optimistic at the end of the day, because they've seen what doesn't work for them, and being optimistic makes coming here to discuss the movie way more interesting.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

At this point, pretty much every other comic book-themed property is skewing towards teens and/or adults, as well as children, other than TMNT. Even The Incredibles 2, which on the surface looks like a children's movie, ends up being a movie that doesn't feel the need to pander to six year olds. And look at the success most of these movies are having. People in my age group (I'm nearly 30) love comic book movies, love adult content, and have fond memories of the TMNT. Get a clue, Platinum.

I think the problem is that TMNT is lumped in with Transformers, GI Joe, and maybe a couple of other properties where the business owners are more focused on the toy sales and toy nostalgia from the '80s. "Kids liked the toys first and foremost, and also there were cartoons, we think... slap some CGI and big-name actors and actresses together, don't forget the product placement, and boom. Box office gold, right?"

Whereas Spiderman, Batman, X-Men, and the Avengers are and were more intrinsically tied to the cartoons (and comics), not the toy sales.

That's my two cents on the viewpoint of the IP holders and filmmakers, anyway.

If you're associated with cartoons, you're associated with comics and so films SOMETIMES try harder. But if you're associated more with toys, then you're forever screwed.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

I think the problem is that TMNT is lumped in with Transformers, GI Joe, and maybe a couple of other properties where the business owners are more focused on the toy sales and toy nostalgia from the '80s. "Kids liked the toys first and foremost, and also there were cartoons, we think... slap some CGI and big-name actors and actresses together, don't forget the product placement, and boom. Box office gold, right?"

Whereas Spiderman, Batman, X-Men, and the Avengers are and were more intrinsically tied to the cartoons (and comics), not the toy sales.

That's my two cents on the viewpoint of the IP holders and filmmakers, anyway.

If you're associated with cartoons, you're associated with comics and so films SOMETIMES try harder. But if you're associated more with toys, then you're forever screwed.

True.
Though all the more frustrating when you look at the history of TMNT comics and the mark they left on the industry. A hugely important comic. Then the first movie adapts that comic and becomes a record-setting film.

[AquaParade]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz0dP_7DB84

Wow. Just the other day, Kevin mentioned that early in the production of the 2014 film, they had talks with Henson about going back to the suits. Very interesting. To hear, go about six minutes in.

It's hard to understand, but it almost seems like he implies that suits, or at least a strong focus on family "with an edge" could be a path for the future. It's possible Kevin knows something we don't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKRu508pdIM

Here's another recent video. A child interviewing Kevin asks if he enjoys the new tmnt movies. Pretty funny. Kevin responds that if they were to do a new one, he'd like it to be animated but more like the old movies and/or comics. Very interesting. We know Kevin isn't in control of these films, but given that he was consulted early on in the 2014 film, as evidenced by him mentioning they spoke to Brian Henson, in the previous video I posted, it's very possible he's alluding to some of the discussions going on behind the scenes, in both videos.

If so (and it's a big "if"), it appears the studio is searching for a way get some of that "edge" back, but still bring the whole family to the theater.