Is TMNT still too tied to Vol. I?

[Darkravager]

Let me begin by saying that the whole reason I'm here on this site is because I read some of the volume I stuff and it blew me away.

I've tracked down some of the Vol I stuff, and I plan to get more. However, I've also gotten a lot of the recent volume of Tales as well. After reading through them, I have a question: Does anyone else think that TMNT is too slavishly tied to the events of Volume I?

I mean, most other comic properties build on the great stories of the past in order to deepen and grow the mythos. It kinda seems to me that TMNT started off with a bang, and has been spinning it's wheels for the last 20 years. Don't get me wrong, I love it, but it just seems as though everything ties back in with Vol. I only.

So, opinions, comments?

[Raph's Girl]

There's several stories set in Vol 4 and there's some upcoming Tales issues that are set in Vol 2 so no I don't think they focus on Vol 1 alot.

[turkishproverb]

I can see his point though, Many of the aspects of V4 are DIRECT continuations fo V1, rather than progressions etc.

[Roseangelo]

I can see his point though, Many of the aspects of V4 are DIRECT continuations fo V1, rather than progressions etc.

Yeah, I'm actually getting really tired of the complete non-progression of the overall TMNT story. I love Vol. 1 for what it is, but I reallyreally wish the story could move beyond it. And no, Vol. 4 doesn't count.

[Mr._Mutant_Man]

Aren't there a lot of aspects of volume 2 too, though? When I first started reading the comics I didn't really have any intention of seeking out volume 2 comics, but after reading volume 4 online I'm curious to see what happened in those comics too.

[Cowabunga Carl]

I've only read volume 4, parts of 1 and 3, and some of the current Tales of TMNT. Personaly I think there is a balance with all the volumes in Tales. My fav issue is #43.

[CyberCubed]

I think the problem is the Mirage TMNT comics have no real villains. How many Mirage villains are there who aren't one-shots or are still alive? Shredder is dead, Baxter is dead, Karai isn't a villain anymore, the Triceratons aren't really villains anymore, Leatherhead is good, Rat King is more of a spirit now, and all we really have is Savanti Romero now.

Why do you think the two cartoons and Archie series had to create all these new mutants, aliens, and other characters? There are very few major villains in the Mirage universe.

Hell, the 4kids cartoon had to create Hun and Bishop, among other characters. The original cartoon had to create Bebop, Rocksteady, Krang and all the other mutants. The Archie comics did the same thing.

There are NO major villains in the Mirage TMNT comics anymore, which is why Volume 4 turned out the way it did. That's the problem with TMNT going in a new direction. What new villains has Mirage created since Volume 1 that weren't one-shots?

[turkishproverb]

Well, not to defend it too much, but the psycho-warriors from V4 would qualify (alternate demension guys)

[PAAATE]

You have a point, but

the Triceratons aren't really villains anymore

I don't think you can say that for sure just yet.. :P

[Mr._Mutant_Man]

I think the problem is the Mirage TMNT comics have no real villains. How many Mirage villains are there who aren't one-shots or are still alive? Shredder is dead, Baxter is dead, Karai isn't a villain anymore, the Triceratons aren't really villains anymore, Leatherhead is good, Rat King is more of a spirit now, and all we really have is Savanti Romero now.

Why do you think the two cartoons and Archie series had to create all these new mutants, aliens, and other characters? There are very few major villains in the Mirage universe.

Hell, the 4kids cartoon had to create Hun and Bishop, among other characters. The original cartoon had to create Bebop, Rocksteady, Krang and all the other mutants. The Archie comics did the same thing.

There are NO major villains in the Mirage TMNT comics anymore, which is why Volume 4 turned out the way it did. That's the problem with TMNT going in a new direction. What new villains has Mirage created since Volume 1 that weren't one-shots?

Was Karai ever really a villain? Maybe in other versions of the turtles, but in the comics she seemed kind of neutral. If I remember correctly she did have a bit of a conflict with the Turtles at first but then they made that deal and they seemed to work together okay after that.

[Raph's Girl]

all we really have is Savanti Romero now

Savanti was defeated in Tales of the TMNT vol 2 with the help of the Wild West C.O.W. Boys of Moo Mesa. Well technically his ego defeated him but still.

TMNT villians:
Shredder - Killed in the first issue by Donatello, cloned, killed again by Leonardo, became a freakish shark thing - killed by Casey, Baby Shadow, and Splinter
Savanti Romero - Only true reacurring villian. His own ego defeated him
Savanti Juliet - Killed by Renet
Rat King - Killed in his first appearance, his spirit helped Splinter in CAW, and then he was defeated and dethroned and replaced by Splinter who's the current Rat King...
Triceratons - After several several defeats and the eventual overthrow of Zandramon lead to the Triceratons eventually becoming crazed fans of the TMNT to the point that they've made their own version of the TMNT animated series....which I'd love to see... *L*
Complete Carnage - Leonardo will eventually kill him sometime in the future in revenge for Carnage killing Radical.
Baxter Stockman - Donatello kills him in Vol 4 after keeping him somewhat alive for some strange purposes for years....

Leatherhead was never a villian in Mirage
Karai was never a villian

[Ninjinister]

We need Diamondback and Copperhead.

[turkishproverb]

Baxter Stockman - Donatello kills him in Vol 4 after keeping him somewhat alive for some strange purposes for years....

He explains why as he kills him. Don couldn't believe such intelligence could be so irredeemably evil, and so hoped to use him for something good someday.

[TristanHuwJones]

We need Diamondback and Copperhead.

Both have become something more interesting. Since Razorback will be hitting the comics first, Diamondback has been renamed. The Diamondback in #36 will be someone altogether different. The original arc and model we had in mind for Copperhead is being used for another character who will be making a BIG entrance. The core focus behind my next Tales issue is to begin addressing the villain situation. If I get the opportunity to write more then that'll be where I put my energies -- villains. And good stories of course!

Don't forget, you've also got Murph's three mystics, who, if all goes well, should be appearing again at least once...

These are comic books too remember, not all deaths are permanent!

[Andrew NDB]

First I'd even throw the question out... why even end volume 1? I don't see any reason TMNT, Vol. 4 #29 couldn't just be TMNT #104, but whatever. :)

If I had to venture an answer to this, it all comes back to City at War, and the kind of book-closing it represented on one chapter of the Turtles' lives. With Volume 2, we saw some attempt at showing us the next chapter... but due to one thing or another (a big part of things being Mirage Publishing closing down around then, what with the floods and all), it never really quite got off the ground or gelled in a way that really "hooked" readers.

Volume 4 tosses the angle at us fairly quickly off the bat, "What if aliens landed on Earth and the TMNT no longer had to hide in the shadows?" as a springboard. I'm not certain that's wholly been explored yet as an angle.

[Cowabunga Carl]

I've been reading vol 4 today and have to say this topic has been on my mind.

Vol 1 seemed more eposodic, like each story was an issue or two. I know RTNY & CAW were more but each story seemed somewhat seperate.

Vol 4 is one huge story. It has been one long continuse story and refferances past events. I don't think it is stuck though.

[Ninjinister]

Both have become something more interesting. Since Razorback will be hitting the comics first, Diamondback has been renamed. The Diamondback in #36 will be someone altogether different. The original arc and model we had in mind for Copperhead is being used for another character who will be making a BIG entrance. The core focus behind my next Tales issue is to begin addressing the villain situation. If I get the opportunity to write more then that'll be where I put my energies -- villains. And good stories of course!

Don't forget, you've also got Murph's three mystics, who, if all goes well, should be appearing again at least once...

These are comic books too remember, not all deaths are permanent!

Sounds interesting!

[jerome]

I'd have to say they are a little too tied to vol. I.

I mean why can't we have a turtles comic where the turtles exist like batman or superman etc. Not every batman story is tied to some idea that Bob Kane put in a book some 70 years ago so why do the turtles always have to fall into the mirage timeline?

I've never been too sure about how i felt about the turtles growing older and having actual deaths etc...why can't they just be like bruce wayne and never age or whatever. I feel that since the turtles' fates have been written (sorta) there is a need to place every adventure somewhere in the mirage-averse. I feel this sorta bogs down the freedom of some writers.

If Jeph Loeb had to lock down exactly when and where and how old batman was during Hush would it have been as free to do the things it did?

I mean some things in comics have to show the passing of time. Dick Grayson got old and turned into night wing, Jason Todd died, Tim Drake became the 3rd (and best robin) but since then nothing has changed. Nightwing is still mid 20's, Bruce Wayne is still late 30's (i think...maybe early 40's) and Tim Drake is still in Highschool. And Jason Todd came back to life but that is neither here nor there...

In short i just think if turtles storied didn't have to fit into a definitive timeline we might get bigger (maybe better...maybe not) stories...

[Roseangelo]

In short i just think if turtles storied didn't have to fit into a definitive timeline we might get bigger (maybe better...maybe not) stories...

I so agree with this. I would really love for a brand new TMNT series that simply focuses on creating a profitable comic with the goal of drawing and maintaining readers. Good art (preferably color), good stories (that have mini-arcs within larger arcs), and a willingness to change things if readership drops.

[TristanHuwJones]

See this goes back to what I said a while ago about putting dates in comics. As soon as you put a date in a newspaper or anything like that, you get readers who cling to that date tenaciously. The most common response I got to #36 was to the fact that they're using cell phones, because cell phones (at least the ones depicted) didn't exist in whatever time frame City at War was set in.

I know a lot of people hold the TMNT dates as gospel, but they end up redundant as years go by. They're good to keep track of what story takes place when in relation to others, but I think now we're at the point where you're better off alluding to dates rather than stating them (ie; twenty years ago, two months ago, then, now, etc.).

You go by dates and particular events then you get horrendous irregularities (ie: Flash Thompson going to Vietnam). I think the only particular events that have been handled well in comics have been the September 11th terrorist attacks in Amazing Spiderman and World War 2 in just about everything.

[Roseangelo]

See this goes back to what I said a while ago about putting dates in comics. As soon as you put a date in a newspaper or anything like that, you get readers who cling to that date tenaciously.

Yeah, I would also agree that this creates problems. I really do wish the TMNT comics were less concerned about timelines and more concerned with good stories.

[Andrew NDB]

I've always liked that time genuinely seems to pass and the characters grow older in the TMNT comics.

I don't like that they do seem to be chaining them to specific years, and even reinforcing them in many recent issues... I'd much rather see the TMNT -- while time still passing, years still going by -- adopt more of a DC-like ever moving continuum.

What do I mean?

Well, look at pretty much any long-standing DC comic. Like... Green Lantern. He's had an ongoing comic since 1960, and pretty much all of the comics (with a few exceptions) from then until now count in continuity. So how can this be? Obviously, if GL was about 30 years old in 1960, he couldn't be 80 years old now in 2008, could he?

It's very simple. There is an ever-moving "Present Day." This year it is 2008 in a comic, but next year present day will be 2009, even if -- in the actual comic books -- only a couple of weeks have actually passed in the story. So technically those 1960 events from GL only happen "5 years ago" or so in the actual comic story.

[TristanHuwJones]

Seeing as I don't really pay attention to dates in comics, which issues have been reinforcing dates?

It was interesting actually, Ryan and I were discussing the timelines and dates when writing #50. We had Don using a computer set up, alluding to the internet, hacking and terrorism and the question as to whether or not these things would exist at the "to-the-date" time this story perhaps could have happened. Again, for me it comes down to kind of ignoring dates.

Actually, when you think about it, if society was advanced enough back in the 80's to have Foot Clan killbots rampaging through the streets and Mousers and all these other wonderful technological marvels, wouldn't it make sense to have stuff like advanced internet and communications technologies then too?

[Andrew NDB]

Seeing as I don't really pay attention to dates in comics, which issues have been reinforcing dates?

Not to point the finger at Will, but I recall the date Donatello types on the typewriter fairly recently in one of his backups.

It was interesting actually, Ryan and I were discussing the timelines and dates when writing #50. We had Don using a computer set up, alluding to the internet, hacking and terrorism and the question as to whether or not these things would exist at the "to-the-date" time this story perhaps could have happened. Again, for me it comes down to kind of ignoring dates.

Actually, when you think about it, if society was advanced enough back in the 80's to have Foot Clan killbots rampaging through the streets and Mousers and all these other wonderful technological marvels, wouldn't it make sense to have stuff like advanced internet and communications technologies then too?

I'm with you, believe me, and I think moving forward TMNT should see what it can do to move in this direction (dodging the Specific Date bullet altogether). But TMNT seems to keep reinforcing the dates thing. The big thing with me was the allusion to 9/11 happening in the middle of the events of early Vol. 4... this pretty much automatically puts TMNT in a parallel universe where Utroms landed in NYC and held a world conference just before the Twin Towers fell.

I don't have a huge problem with the Utroms and their world conference... I'd just prefer it kept in a kind of ever moving forward "Near Future" rather than tethered to some specific date that's already past.

Similarly, how Terminator 3 anchored itself to 2004 as the date of Judgement Day. How silly is that? Obviously they'd know within a couple of years of the film's date it would be a joke. You know?

[TristanHuwJones]

See I don't have any problems with t3. In the Terminator universe we KNOW without a shadow of a doubt that Judgement Day happened in 2004. All the logic regarding the war and Skynet is sound in T3, and it makes more sense to make T3, set it immediately and then move on to the Skynet wars in the future for sequels, RATHER than making a film in 2004 and setting it before 1997 (that was when the bomb hit wasn't it?). Ultimately, while they can change the sequence of events, they're never going to be able to prevent Skynet from taking over (otherwise the films would never have happened).

So long as they don't make any "this-is-what-happened-between-t3-and-t4" movies then the series is still safe.

I also choose to completely ignore Sarah Connor Chronicles. I made it like 10 minutes into that series and was on the floor laughing. I picked, shot-for-shot, how the first terminator would reveal itself. That show was not my cup of tea at all.

[Andrew NDB]

See I don't have any problems with t3. In the Terminator universe we KNOW without a shadow of a doubt that Judgement Day happened in 2004. All the logic regarding the war and Skynet is sound in T3, and it makes more sense to make T3, set it immediately and then move on to the Skynet wars in the future for sequels, RATHER than making a film in 2004 and setting it before 1997 (that was when the bomb hit wasn't it?). Ultimately, while they can change the sequence of events, they're never going to be able to prevent Skynet from taking over (otherwise the films would never have happened).

I don't know that time travel works like that, even in the Terminator universe.

My theory...

[geek mode on]

Way I see it, everything beyond the ending of T3 is pretty much uncharted territory... we're in a new timeline now.

The events of the timeline can't be rectified into a singular timeline. T2 changed the timeline, and T3 changed it again. What we have is a bunch of alternate timelines being created every time the movies mess with the future again.

In the first timeline, SkyNET went live in 1997 via CyberDyne Systems, nukes and countermeasures exchanged with Russia, Judgement Day. Kyle Reese is sent back in 2029 by John Connor.

In the second timeline, Judgement Day is averted, postponed until 2004 where it goes via Cyber Research Systems/CRS (instead of CyberDyne, destroyed in 1994/95 in T2). In 2032, John is killed by a T-850 just after he and his top lieutenants score a triumphant victory over SkyNET.

In the third timeline in the aftermath of T3, Judgement Day really did happen in 2004 via CRS, John may or may not still be killed by a T-850 in 2032 (probably not, since he would certainly see it coming this time), but now all of his top lieutenants are dead (killed by the T-X in 2004).

It's not clear if John sending Kyle back in time to meet his mother still goes on schedule in 2029 in either of the latter timelines (it's possibly everything that happened in 2029 just got bumped to 2032, happening more or less the same).

What we DO know is that even if John, now, in the current third timeline, sends Kyle Reese back to 1984 to meet his mother, it wouldn't play out exactly as it did in T1. Kyle would tell her Judgement Day happens in 2004, not 1997; Kyle would tell her Arnie is a Cyber Research Systems T-800, Model 101, not CyberDyne, etc., etc..

Further corrupting the issue would be this : In this new timeline, the T-800 in T2 would tell Sarah Connor that Miles Bennet Dyson was NOT responsible for the creation of SkyNET (and in 2004 rather than 1997) but rather Robert Brewster, and CyberDyne systems was NOT responsible but rather Cyber Research Systems. So Sarah would go after CRS in T2 instead of CyberDyne, meanwhile CyberDyne would STILL have the arm and chip from T1, even in an altered timeline. So, Sarah blows up CRS instead of CyberDyne in T2 (in this new timeline), meanwhile CyberDyne goes on to launch SkyNet on schedule in 1997 potentially!

As such, it's really almost easier to rectify if John does NOTHING in this new timeline -- doesn't send Kyle back, only watches his back for T-850s in 2032. I don't believe time travel is such that if John doesn't send Kyle back he'll just vanish in the present... what we have here is alternate timelines, branches if you will, each one with different events.

An endless loops of 1997 => 2004 => 1997 => 2004 => 1997 and on and on. It actually works if you really think about it.

[geek mode off]

So long as they don't make any "this-is-what-happened-between-t3-and-t4" movies then the series is still safe.

I'm not sure how you mean. I'm just saying they shouldn't have even mentioned the year in T3, so we can assume those events just happen sometime in the "Near Future" rather than make us go, "Ehh... but 2004 was ****ing like 4 years ago, and I didn't see any nukes dropping." You know?

Like Mad Max and the Road Warrior. "Near Future," not painting themselves into a corner to any one year or years.

I also choose to completely ignore Sarah Connor Chronicles.

Good man. And you can bet for damned sure T4 isn't going to acknowledge it. We already know Kate is in T4... and you pretty much can't have both T3 and Sarah Connor Chronicles.

In truth, I was semi-interested in Sarah Connor Chronicles for the first couple of episodes... then, just blegh. I know Smallville has its fans, but it's like the Smallville study in, "How little can we show fans without them crying foul?" leading us around with a carrot (John one day becoming the savior of mankind, Judgement Day happening; Clark one day becoming Superman) without actually ever delivering anything substantial.

[TristanHuwJones]

Man, I never considered that Cyberdyne/CRS thing! Good thinking! I'm gonna have to rewatch them!

I see your point about them saying "near future", but as I said, so long as they don't make any movies set between 2004 and the beginning of the Skynet war then it's still safe to use that date, at least in my mind. I think everyone will be changing their timeline theories when t4 and t5 hit anyway!

[Andrew NDB]

*possible spoiler below*


























Yeah, if the rumors are to be believed, John will get killed by the T-850, then his skin and memories put onto/into a reprogrammed Terminator to make people think John doesn't die to carry on as a figurehead.

I see fans lashing out at the idea... but I think it's kind of cool. It's thinking outside of the box.

You want to know what's not cool, though? Terminator 4 being PG-13. Here it is, the Future War, what we've been waiting to see since the beginning (many/most of us thinking we'd never see)... machines gunning down TechCOM in the trenches of a post-apocalypse, humans on the run with only a paltry resistance to fight back to Saving Private Ryan-levels of gritty warfare... and apparently it'll just all be neutered.

[Darkravager]

Andrew, you might want to add a possible spoiler alert to that.

I know it's just a rumor now, but some people might not want to know even that.

[TristanHuwJones]

Yeah, if the rumors are to be believed, John will get killed by the T-850, then his skin and memories put onto/into a reprogrammed Terminator to make people think John doesn't die to carry on as a figurehead.

I see fans lashing out at the idea... but I think it's kind of cool. It's thinking outside of the box.

You want to know what's not cool, though? Terminator 4 being PG-13. Here it is, the Future War, what we've been waiting to see since the beginning (many/most of us thinking we'd never see)... machines gunning down TechCOM in the trenches of a post-apocalypse, humans on the run with only a paltry resistance to fight back to Saving Private Ryan-levels of gritty warfare... and apparently it'll just all be neutered.

I dunno, I think you can really push pg-13's these days. Dark Knight still astonishes me. I think if t2 had've been rated for today it probably could've got a pg-13.

[Andrew NDB]

I dunno, I think you can really push pg-13's these days. Dark Knight still astonishes me. I think if t2 had've been rated for today it probably could've got a pg-13.

Pretty sure you can't graphically show kneecaps getting blown apart and fingers to the eyesocket/skull in PG-13, but yeah, T2 is pretty close on the PG-13 front. T1, no way. And a Future War movie? Impossible. Not without selling the kind of material it revolves around way short.

I can't think of any good PG-13 war movies off the top of my head. Can you? Certainly not set amidst something as grim as a post-apocalyptic Man against Machine world backdrop. I foresee a lot of shaky cam, MTV-style quick cut nonsense.

And nothing in Batman Begins pushed the PG-13 envelope, really. It did make the most of the rating, though, absolutely.

[turkishproverb]

Pretty sure you can't graphically show kneecaps getting blown apart and fingers to the eyesocket/skull in PG-13, but yeah, T2 is pretty close on the PG-13 front. T1, no way. And a Future War movie? Impossible. Not without selling the kind of material it revolves around way short.

I can't think of any good PG-13 war movies off the top of my head. Can you? Certainly not set amidst something as grim as a post-apocalyptic Man against Machine world backdrop. I foresee a lot of shaky cam, MTV-style quick cut nonsense.

And nothing in Batman Begins pushed the PG-13 envelope, really. It did make the most of the rating, though, absolutely.

Actually, T1 could probably get it nowadays, honestly. Not that its not still a great movie. SO could alot of classic horror. Rating creep has been happening for a while in live action.

[Andrew NDB]

Actually, T1 could probably get it nowadays, honestly

We didn't watch the same movie. Punching a guy through the chest bloodily, carving out an eyeball, viscerally gunning down a whole station's worth of police, a sex scene (crack! nipple! I see nipple!). A ton of F bombs.

And the only "Rating Creep" I've seen is down (Die Hard 4 was an incalculable travesty). As well as action movie lovers' expectations.

[turkishproverb]

We didn't watch the same movie. Punching a guy through the chest bloodily, carving out an eyeball, viscerally gunning down a whole station's worth of police, a sex scene (crack! nipple! I see nipple!). A ton of F bombs.

And the only "Rating Creep" I've seen is down. As well as action movie lovers' expectations.

Sigh. I'm not going to argue T1 anymore, its really not worth the effort. the movie wasn't THAT good.

As to rating creep down, I think you might underestimate slighly, have you watched Gunner Palace?

For that matter, I think Harvard did something on it as well, though their criteria could be debated....

[malpractice]

I also choose to completely ignore Sarah Connor Chronicles. I made it like 10 minutes into that series and was on the floor laughing. I picked, shot-for-shot, how the first terminator would reveal itself. That show was not my cup of tea at all.

Sarah Conner Chronicles >>>>> T3

[Andrew NDB]

Sigh. I'm not going to argue T1 anymore, its really not worth the effort. the movie wasn't THAT good.

It's funny you say that. 90% of Terminator fans I know actually have come to revere T1 over T2 in recent years.

I find myself torn between my childhood love of T2 and the sheer unbridled noir thrill of T1. I can't pick a favorite... I might as well pick who I like better, Mom or Dad.

T1 is certainly worlds above T2 in terms of grittiness and such content, in any case. Some of the effects and such have become sadly a bit dated, but you have to look past that as you would any film of that era or older.

As to rating creep down, I think you might underestimate slighly, have you watched Gunner Palace?

No. Should I?

[turkishproverb]

It's funny you say that. 90% of Terminator fans I know actually have come to revere T1 over T2 in recent years.

IT is, still doesn't mean its god enough to argue about my opinion of the rating.

I find myself torn between my childhood love of T2 and the sheer unbridled noir thrill of T1. I can't pick a favorite... I might as well pick who I like better, Mom or Dad.

I had puritanistic parents. I didn't see either until I got older, so no fighting those two urges for me. Although I can make the second choice more easily.

T1 is certainly worlds above T2 in terms of grittiness and such content.

Agreed.

No. Should I?

Has alot more F bombs than any PG-13 movie I've seen from the 90's, to start. Not saying anything about the quality, just the example of ratings creep.

[TristanHuwJones]

Pretty sure you can't graphically show kneecaps getting blown apart and fingers to the eyesocket/skull in PG-13, but yeah, T2 is pretty close on the PG-13 front. T1, no way. And a Future War movie? Impossible. Not without selling the kind of material it revolves around way short.

I don't know, I can't think of anything that was really that graphic in t2. The most graphic thing in my mind is the holocaust dream. The other thing about the future war is that all the Terminators use laser weapons, people being hit by those will be like seeing people die in Star Wars. It's like that in all the Terminator movies. Purple/blue beams followed by a puff of smoke and some sparks. They can put as much of that into t4 and have a pg-13 without worry.

I can't think of any good PG-13 war movies off the top of my head. Can you? Certainly not set amidst something as grim as a post-apocalyptic Man against Machine world backdrop. I foresee a lot of shaky cam, MTV-style quick cut nonsense.

But then you have to ask how many war movies have you seen where the enemy is an army of robots? Again, Star Wars comes to mind...
To be completely honest, the scene where the Troll is unleashed in the tunnels in The Spiderwick Chronicles is more intense than the future war sequence in t1.

A Terminator movie set in the future could get a pg-13 and be just as intense as any of the other Terminator films.

Most war movies get an r rating for realistic depictions of war. The Thin Red Line wasn't exactly Saving Private Ryan, but both got R-ratings. A war against robots in a post-apocalyptic future won't get an R, unless they start throwing in gratuitous amounts of violence and gore, which ultimately aren't really that necessary to the Terminator films. Yeah, they're violent, but they're never NEEDLESSLY violent.

In the end, it can be done.

[Andrew NDB]

I don't know, I can't think of anything that was really that graphic in t2. The most graphic thing in my mind is the holocaust dream.

I make specific examples of what simply wouldn't stand in a PG-13 movie from T2.

Now, could a slightly reedited T2 exist as PG-13 and still be just fine? Yes, sure. But it can't be denied there is at least a bit of irrefutable R content there. The biggest thing in my mind is the finger through the skull.

The other thing about the future war is that all the Terminators use laser weapons, people being hit by those will be like seeing people die in Star Wars. It's like that in all the Terminator movies. Purple/blue beams followed by a puff of smoke and some sparks. They can put as much of that into t4 and have a pg-13 without worry.

You make a good point, but without actually showing the carnage, the bodies, the cost of the War, the down side... what are we really seeing but just elaborate pyrotechnics and lightshows? I'm not interested in that.

But then you have to ask how many war movies have you seen where the enemy is an army of robots? Again, Star Wars comes to mind...

Episode I-III? No, good examples, Tristan. :)

A Terminator movie set in the future could get a pg-13 and be just as intense as any of the other Terminator films.

Can't buy into that, Tristan. It can come close, but approaching the Future War with 13 year-old kid gloves is outrageous in my book.

Unless they literally just make it a very personal story that only peripherally shows glimpses of the real fighting in the Future War... in which case it would beg the question of why they should even bother taking us to the Future War in the first place if not to take us into it knee-deep.

Yeah, they're violent, but they're never NEEDLESSLY violent.

The T-800 punching the kid through the chest was needed in T1? The finger through the eyeball in T2 was needed?

I'm not saying either movie is super gratuitous, but there's plenty of visceral examples here and there.

In the end, it can be done.

I agree. I'd even throw out there that the PG-13 rating isn't even at the top of the list of worries about the film.

How truly confident are you in McG making a fourth Terminator movie amist the Future War, PG-13, believable and a worthy installment?

[TristanHuwJones]

Hang on, sure, there's gore when the Terminator punches a hole in the punk, and when he gouges out his eye, and when they're generally doing their thing terminating people, but go back and watch all the sequences set in the future. Nothing in any of those says an R rating for me, and to be honest I can't come up with any good reason for a Terminator to do any of the more graphic things they do in T1 an T2 in a movie set in the future. In those films, it was all about getting to a target. In the future, it's all about extermination.

I think seeing Samarah's father electrocute himself in The Ring was more impacting than the scenes you're quoting.

You make a good point, but without actually showing the carnage, the bodies, the cost of the War, the down side... what are we really seeing but just elaborate pyrotechnics and lightshows? I'm not interested in that.

Again, there's nothing in any of the previous film's future war sections that warrants an R. You can have a future war movie, totally in line with everything we see in the other movies at PG-13.

Episode I-III? No, good examples, Tristan.

I know we're not being serious on this example, but think about it, if they hadn't been robots there'd be some very serious discussions going on about ratings. If you take any faceless, non-realist enemy, be it a Clone, a Stormtrooper or a robot, and make it a person, then you're looking at something else. If you switched all the lasers for bullets and aliens/robots for people, Star Wars would be in dire trouble.

How truly confident are you in McG making a fourth Terminator movie amist the Future War, PG-13, believable and a worthy installment?

If Christian Bale has faith in it, then I do to. :lol:

[jerome]

well first I don't see any way possible with out a major re-edit of T2 that it could pass as a PG13. The finger through the eye ball that Andrew keeps bringing up isn't nearly as graphic as the blade through the carton of milk, through the step parent's mouth, out the back of the head, and into the wall....(I can't remember which parent it was: step mom or step dad).

You would also have to cut out the sexual overtones of the creepy hospital guard and sarah, no blood when arnold cuts the skin off his arm, no needle full of drain-o in the neck, no beating a hospital worker with a broom stick etc. You also can't show smoking in a movie now-a-days. Mpaa decided that that is an automatic R...

I remember when T2 first aired on Fox and the had to cut out a LOT of scenes and force camera movements (even more than the pan and scan already did). It was balls terrible....

Secondly: hey remember when we were talking about ninja turtles?;)

anyway, as much as i've out grown the old show and really can't stand it anymore i think it serves as a good example of how to handle the turtles in regards to a timeline. Aside from maybe the technodrome moving from middle of the earth to under the ocean to dimension X time never really passed. Every episode took place in modern day...

and i liked the cell phones in tales 36. It made me feel like i was reading about something HAPPENING in a alternate superhero reality and not reading about something that already HAPPENED to mutated ninja turtles in my reality. haha if that even makes sense...

[turkishproverb]

If Christian Bale has faith in it, then I do to. :lol:

IN his name we hope.

Amen. :P

Seriously though, the guy does manage to pick surprisingly good films.

[TristanHuwJones]

Mpaa decided that that is an automatic R...

Are you serious?! Did Hulk land an R? I can't believe the state of things these days. I don't watch characters like JJJ in Spidey and Thunderbolt Ross smoking a cigar and think "Man, that guy is boss!".

Secondly: hey remember when we were talking about ninja turtles?;)

anyway, as much as i've out grown the old show and really can't stand it anymore i think it serves as a good example of how to handle the turtles in regards to a timeline. Aside from maybe the technodrome moving from middle of the earth to under the ocean to dimension X time never really passed. Every episode took place in modern day...

and i liked the cell phones in tales 36. It made me feel like i was reading about something HAPPENING in a alternate superhero reality and not reading about something that already HAPPENED to mutated ninja turtles in my reality. haha if that even makes sense...

Yeah, makes total sense. I think ultimately, it's fine to tie things to the past, but so long as it's a past tense thing (unless it's something like what Bendis is doing with Secret Invasion - filling in the gaps in a very intriguing way that adds to the story AND holds it's own at the same time.

I get what you mean about the cell phones too. It goes back to that whole continual present day situation that Andrew mentioned. If you set it in the 80's you find people start tearing it apart going "well, we didn't have cars that style in the 80's" "he/she is dressed wrong for that year" etc.

Actually, I just thought of something.

The story I'm working on at the moment takes place in two separate eras. I had a pretty long discussion with Peter about the ages of certain characters and how that worked in relation to a quoted time in the CAW arc. Instead of pegging it with a specific date, or dating the time with fashion nuances and such, it simply opens with a very important event "Then" and then when that ends, we find out that one particular character has been out of the picture for 11 years, picking up a little while (but never specified) after #36, or "Now". There'll also be a moment that helps establish that it's set AFTER Volume 2, and roughly the time frame that whole saga took place. In the end, none of it really impacts the story drastically, as it still stands on it's own, but for me as a fan, I like having these little nods to continuity. Hopefully you guys will feel the same when you read it.

For me, it's all about dodging dates. Everything in #36 alludes to things happening at certain times. City at War happened "nearly a year" before, there's a ton of references, but none are specific. The other reason I like to do this is because there's a selfish part of me that wants EVERYONE to be able to read it without feeling like they have to go back and read through piles of Turtle history (even though I wish they would).

Balance.

[jerome]

IN his name we hope.

Amen. :P

Seriously though, the guy does manage to pick surprisingly good films.

well he has lately but lets not forget his amazing choice in roles such as Reign Of Fire :lol:

T4 will suck. McG in in charge...do you have any idea of what he wanted to do when he was attached to Superman Returns?! this man is a joke. You can put Orsen Wells, Jack Nicholson, Tom Hanks, and the ghost of Christopher Reeves in this movie and it would still suck. I don't care who the actor is you can't save a movie from a horrible director. For example look at the star wars prequels. Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Terrance Stamp, Christopher Lee, Jimmy Smits, and Sam jackson were all in them. These are all considered to at least be good if not great actors and they still couldn't save stale dialogue and horrible directing. The stories weren't the problem with these movies...it was the script and the directing and no cast of A-Listers could save it.

T4 will be just as bad if not worse than a paul ws anderson movie. Remember the first AVP....it was PG13 also....

any who...back to the turtles...

[TristanHuwJones]

Yeah, but McG has only directed like two proper movies - the Charlies Angels movies. Haven't seen We Are Marshall either. The dude deserves a chance. Paul Anderson was putting out trash before AVP and I knew he'd **** that up no matter what. McG doesn't have the same sort of track record going into T4 as Anderson did going into AVP. I'll admit, I'm cautious, and yes I did see his Superman script, but in retrospect, I'd rather have seen the McG superman than the one I ended up seeing (he didn't even throw a goddamn punch!! I saw it with friend of mine, she only knew of Superman peripherally and said it flat out sucked and in telling her about the other pitches that were made said that the McG one would've been a better movie). In the end, it probably doesn't make much difference to me because I don't really like Superman much at all, but that's just me. The other thing there is that McG isn't writing the script, it's already done and it's by the T3 guys.

I'm cautiously optimistic :lol:

[turkishproverb]

Yeah, but McG has only directed like two proper movies - the Charlies Angels movies. Haven't seen We Are Marshall either. The dude deserves a chance. Paul Anderson was putting out trash before AVP and I knew he'd **** that up no matter what. McG doesn't have the same sort of track record going into T4 as Anderson did going into AVP. I'll admit, I'm cautious, and yes I did see his Superman script, but in retrospect, I'd rather have seen the McG superman than the one I ended up seeing (he didn't even throw a goddamn punch!! I saw it with friend of mine, she only knew of Superman peripherally and said it flat out sucked and in telling her about the other pitches that were made said that the McG one would've been a better movie). In the end, it probably doesn't make much difference to me because I don't really like Superman much at all, but that's just me. The other thing there is that McG isn't writing the script, it's already done and it's by the T3 guys.

I'm cautiously optimistic :lol:

I've heard We are marshal was better at least than the Charlie's angels movies.

[Andrew NDB]

I'll admit, I'm cautious, and yes I did see his Superman script, but in retrospect, I'd rather have seen the McG superman than the one I ended up seeing (he didn't even throw a goddamn punch!! I saw it with friend of mine, she only knew of Superman peripherally and said it flat out sucked and in telling her about the other pitches that were made said that the McG one would've been a better movie).

The only thing that was kind of scary about the McG Superman was his intent to cast Beyonce Knowles as Lois Lane. Yeah.

Other than that, I agree with you. It actually would have been what Superman needed, a good solid reboot/relaunch unfettered by Donner movies that are mostly unwatchable now.

Like him or hate him, I actually didn't hear one negative thing in all the bits of news about Superman when Brett Ratner was on the project. He seemed to bring a genuine vision for it to the table, not just a toothless homage-fest/Donner blowjob as Singer did.

[turkishproverb]

The only thing that was kind of scary about the McG Superman was his intent to cast Beyonce Knowles as Lois Lane. Yeah.

Other than that, I agree with you. It actually would have been what Superman needed, a good solid reboot/relaunch unfettered by Donner movies that are mostly unwatchable now.

Like him or hate him, I actually didn't hear one negative thing in all the bits of news about Superman when Brett Ratner was on the project. He seemed to bring a genuine vision for it to the table, not just a toothless homage-fest/Donner blowjob as Singer did.

Kind've ironic that Ratner and Singer switched pictures, ain't it?

[Coola Yagami]

Interesting... if TMNT volume 1 never ended and kept going... does that mean that they'd have a Crisis to undo the events of the Image run?

[TristanHuwJones]

The Image stuff never happened in the Mirage Universe.

[jerome]

The Image stuff never happened in the Mirage Universe.

yeah but saying that we would like turtles to be less tied to vol.I would mean allowing stuff like vol.3 to be canon. So yeah when someone wanted to reboot the series or whatever there would have to be some sort of big DC Crisis type of event to set everything back at 0.

I don't mind this idea. It works for DC and Marvel (although i think marvel's handling of spiderman right now is lame) and i don't mind Image's run of the turtles.

Also another point to bring up is that maybe if turtles wasn't as tied to Vol.I maybe it might attract some bigger names like Loeb, Johns, Milliar, etc. I mean with all the lovecraft fanboy-ism swamping tales now-a-days imagine if Mike Mignola was able to come in and tell any story with the turtles that he wanted without having to pin down the exact day month and year the story takes place on so that it doesn't interfere with the time Mikey had to much junk food and then had a dream about the time he rode a giant worm and then had to save a dinosaur or whatever story is in tales this month...:roll:

[TristanHuwJones]

yeah but saying that we would like turtles to be less tied to vol.I would mean allowing stuff like vol.3 to be canon. So yeah when someone wanted to reboot the series or whatever there would have to be some sort of big DC Crisis type of event to set everything back at 0.

Not really, Dreamwave managed to kinda do it, and there was no need for any kind of Crisis. See the big problem I have with doing something like that is that you negate everything that's happened up until now. Longtime readers (some, not all) will get in a stink because -- similar to the fear surrounding Brand New Day -- it erases all these great stories from the continuity.

In all honesty, all the crises that have happened in the DC universe have really put me off getting any further into DC than Batman. I know there are a lot of good reads out there, but Batman is the only one I really read regularly. I read the Sinestro Corps stuff, a lot of Green Lantern, a few Superman stories here and there and some mini's every now and then. Ultimately, the reason DC had their Crisis events is because there was just way too much going on that contradicted other things within those universes, so they NEEDED to reboot. Turtles simply doesn't need to be rebooted.

I don't mind this idea. It works for DC and Marvel (although i think marvel's handling of spiderman right now is lame) and i don't mind Image's run of the turtles.

I love the Image stuff, and it could very easily fit into the Mirage canon, but it isn't OFFICIALLY a part of it. That doesn't mean you can't still fit it in in your own way. Hell, that's what I did.
The problem with things like that is that it often doesn't (work). It works in the pre-existing fanbase, because they know what's going on and who's who and all that. I know a tonne of people that were considering picking up some DC titles but were scared off when the last Crisis started, and 52 and Countdown didn't help them either.
I didn't quite know where to stand with Spidey at first, being a longtime fan, but when it became clear WHEN it all fit in with the Secret Invasion stuff going on I was fine with it. I hate Bob Gale's stuff though. The thing about Brand New Day though, is that it literally has wiped the slate clean so new readers can come on board and be introduced to everyone easily, but there's more in it for older readers because they've been with it the whole way. Countdown, 52 and Crisis just don't work as jumping on points.


Also another point to bring up is that maybe if turtles wasn't as tied to Vol.I maybe it might attract some bigger names like Loeb, Johns, Milliar, etc.

I think the contracts and the extreme amounts of money they receive on high profile titles would make this extremely unlikely. And the other thing is that all the characters that Millar, Loeb, Johns, Bendis and whoever else write for have YEARS of continuity to deal with, and legions more fans to answer to than the Mirage comics.

I mean with all the lovecraft fanboy-ism swamping tales now-a-days

Tales #45?

imagine if Mike Mignola was able to come in and tell any story with the turtles that he wanted without having to pin down the exact day month and year the story takes place on so that it doesn't interfere with the time Mikey had to much junk food and then had a dream about the time he rode a giant worm and then had to save a dinosaur or whatever story is in tales this month...

I can't quite gather where you're standing on Tales. You seem to want things tied to things in continuity, but you don't want random tales either. If the Turtles rebooted, we'd just end running loops -- eventually, things would be tied to THAT continuity, and they'd have to reboot again. The other thing is, what if Mike Mignola did want to come on a do a Turtles issue, but wanted to tie it to something from Vol.1 - something like that guy with the telescope spying on April's apartment way back in that one panel in #4?

Again, I can't speak for all the writers, but I know that I always try to push things into new territory AND tie it into the history at the same time. If it doesn't make sense in the greater scheme of things, then people write it off and start asking questions -- this contradicts that, what about when Raph did this back in this issue, etc.

There are a number of key events in every comic book character's story that can't be ****ed with: Batman, it's his origin, Spidey, same deal, but add Gwen Stacy's death to that, Turtles, it's things like the original Shredder story and City at War. These were key events that pretty much sculpted the world and characters, and they'll always be important.

[CyberCubed]

The Image series did take the Mirage continuity into a new direction, some stuff was directly tied to Vol. 1 like Shadow's biological family being a mafia crime boss, but things were actually progressing. Characters matured, new villains were introduced, (Pimiko being the most notable), and it seemed like things were never going to be the same.

The problem is Volume 4 acts like Image never happened, so we went back to square one. The other problem is Volume 4 doesn't really have any set direction, its fairly obvious Laird is just making it up as he goes along.

A lot of the Tales V.2 stories kind of have the same problem, most of them are one-shots that just deal with some random one-shot alien or monster. I do like that some of them bring the Utroms back into the focus, and some other Foot stories or crime stories, but the lack of continuity (the book jumps around different time periods), is what cancels out any regular on-going arcs.

I don't know what to say, I do enjoy all the new books Mirage puts out but it really does feel like most of it re-treads old ground.

[Andrew NDB]

The Image stuff never happened in the Mirage Universe.

That's not accurate to say.

What would be accurate to say would be, "The Image stuff used to have happened in the Mirage Universe, but doesn't anymore."

[Aztec General]

Let's be honest here, while there is a lot of good additional canon, the main storyline for TMNT is:

Collected Book I (Vol. 1 #1-11 & 4 Micros)
Tales of the TMNT (Vol. 1 #1-7)
Return to New York (Vol. 1 #19-21)
City At War (Vol. 1 #48-62)

There have been other issues that have been excellent and most definitely canon but these are the main thrust of the story. One could only read the above issues and fully understand 98% of the TMNT story.

Although, I do believe one could add Tristan's work on Tales Vol. 2 to the above mix (Tales Vol. 2 #36, 50, 56, soon 59 & 61). It's stellar! And I'm really not just saying that because he's always on here; he really has returned to the feel of the original canon IMHO.

[TristanHuwJones]

That's not accurate to say.

What would be accurate to say would be, "The Image stuff used to have happened in the Mirage Universe, but doesn't anymore."

True, but that's ultimately just a roundabout way of saying "It never happened in the Mirage Universe. It's all very Obi-Wan Kenobi and points of view. Don't get me wrong, you know I love the Image run, but with the way things are, it just didn't happen (yet anyway).

Let's be honest here, while there is a lot of good additional canon, the main storyline for TMNT is:

Collected Book I (Vol. 1 #1-11 & 4 Micros)
Tales of the TMNT (Vol. 1 #1-7)
Return to New York (Vol. 1 #19-21)
City At War (Vol. 1 #48-62)

There have been other issues that have been excellent and most definitely canon but these are the main thrust of the story. One could only read the above issues and fully understand 98% of the TMNT story.

Although, I do believe one could add Tristan's work on Tales Vol. 2 to the above mix (Tales Vol. 2 #36, 50, 56, soon 59 & 61). It's stellar! And I'm really not just saying that because he's always on here; he really has returned to the feel of the original canon IMHO.

Thanks dude! But I agree 100% about what you've listed above. I would include Volume 2 though as it definitely sets the scene for the Turtles' lives post-City at War. We know Volume 4 is canon too, but it's also a WIP.

[CyberCubed]

That's what's funny about the Mirage universe. Despite the series going on for 25 years, very little has actually happened, especially compared to other comic series.

The fact that each series gets canceled quickly doesn't help. Tales V. 1 only lasted 7 issues. Vol. 2 only lasted 13 issues. Vol. 4 so far only 29. Image only 23.

Vol. 1 lasted 62, but a lot of the issues in the middle are one-shot self-contained stories, some being alternate takes of the Turtles. Most of the specials Mirage released are also self-contained stories.

Tales V. 2 has done a wonderful job providing us with many great stories set around the Turtle timeline, but at the same time it feels like most of them are one-shots that will never be referenced again down the road.

25 years! And really, so little has actually happened.

[Andrew NDB]

True, but that's ultimately just a roundabout way of saying "It never happened in the Mirage Universe."

But it's simply not accurate and unfair to the material and unfair to Gary and his team. For a long period of time, it did happen in the Mirage Universe.

Mirage said so. Dan said so. Peter said so. Kevin said so.

It's only in recent years we're told, "Oh, that? It didn't happen now. Doesn't feel right."

Which is fine, but to say, "It never happened" implies Volume 3 was just always it's own thing from the get-go. If that was the case, no one certainly ever let Gary Carlson, Frank Fosco, or Erik Larsen know that.

[TristanHuwJones]

But it's simply not accurate and unfair to the material and unfair to Gary and his team. For a long period of time, it did happen in the Mirage Universe.

Mirage said so. Dan said so. Peter said so. Kevin said so.

It's only in recent years we're told, "Oh, that? It didn't happen now. Doesn't feel right."

Which is fine, but to say, "It never happened" implies Volume 3 was just always it's own thing from the get-go. If that was the case, no one certainly ever let Gary Carlson, Frank Fosco, or Erik Larsen know that.

Yeah, but if someone asks me what they should read now, I'll give them the essentials, and Vol. 3 isn't included. That doesn't mean I'm not going to recommend it (highly, in fact). It just means it isn't a necessary read now.

We've all spoken about this enough to KNOW exactly what most people think of Volume 3. You and I have spoken a number of times about it and you know exactly what my position on it is. What I said was simply a response to a comment. It's accurate because that's the way it is. Now. I can't see anything unfair about it either, even Gary said in an interview that ultimately, it's up to Peter and Kevin, same as the Volume 1 stuff that has been nixed from the "official" timeline. It's not like their work isn't appreciated -- look at Zulli's book. Not continuity, but appreciated nonetheless, even more than the continuity stuff by some.

[CyberCubed]

Did we ever find out if the "Doctor X" Utrom from that Tales issue was an intentional nod to the same Doctor X Utrom that's with Leatherhead in the Image series?

Seems waaay too coincidental that we see in Tales that Leatherhead was good friends with an Utrom named Doctor X, especially since in Image, Doctor X was left behind as the TCRI building was destroyed and LH found him and nursed him back to health.

It's almost as if you can kinda put Image into continuity if you want, as long as you write fanfiction as to how the Turtles get all healed and such.

[TristanHuwJones]

Did we ever find out if the "Doctor X" Utrom from that Tales issue was an intentional nod to the same Doctor X Utrom that's with Leatherhead in the Image series?

Seems waaay too coincidental that we see in Tales that Leatherhead was good friends with an Utrom named Doctor X, especially since in Image, Doctor X was left behind as the TCRI building was destroyed and LH found him and nursed him back to health.

It's almost as if you can kinda put Image into continuity if you want, as long as you write fanfiction as to how the Turtles get all healed and such.

That may have something to do with Ryan Brown, as he co-plotted that issue. I think Ryan may have also had some significant influence on the Image story as well, as when we wrote #50, he was pretty specific about the design for Leatherhead, which was really close to the Image look. I seem to remember someone mentioning something similar somewhere too.