Live Action Turtle Designs: Barron's '90 Turtles v.s. '91 SOTO Turtles

[FellowChucker]

Which designs did you prefer?

How would you classify the differences?

I personally feel to make the movie more kid friendly, less gritty, for the sequel they made the turtles for the second film more cartoony looking. Bigger eyes, much bigger expressions. Even for live action turtles, more cartoony.

I obviously prefer the more nuances, detailed, smaller eyed design og the turtles in the original. The ones that were designed by Henson himself, and not his company.

Does anyone have legit information on why they were even changed? No longer the subtle details like a scar on Raphael's beak for instance. By the third film, the designs fell off a cliff. But I've seen some say they prefer the live action turtle designs from Secret Of The Ooze sequel.

Just wanted to see what fellow hardcore turtle fans feel about the changes made, preferences, etc.

[samxsteal]

Which designs did you prefer?

How would you classify the differences?

I personally feel to make the movie more kid friendly, less gritty, for the sequel they made the turtles for the second film more cartoony looking. Bigger eyes, much bigger expressions. Even for live action turtles, more cartoony.

I obviously prefer the more nuances, detailed, smaller eyed design og the turtles in the original. The ones that were designed by Henson himself, and not his company.

Does anyone have legit information on why they were even changed? No longer the subtle details like a scar on Raphael's beak for instance. By the third film, the designs fell off a cliff. But I've seen some say they prefer the live action turtle designs from Secret Of The Ooze sequel.

Just wanted to see what fellow hardcore turtle fans feel about the changes made, preferences, etc.
I wish they could have keep the proportions from the first but use the expressions from the future versions. As a whole i love them both i get the cartoony feel they were going for. I also kind of Like the Third movie suit to an extent i like how the some how slimmed them down. not that it was really necessary, but seemed to add movement which is good.

[Roseangelo]

The main difference between the two is that for the 1990 movie they were doing something brand new. For the 1991 movie they were able to improve the suits based on experience from the first movie. This included being able to slim down parts of the Turtles, which was important for the people inside the suits.

[Candy Kappa]

Although the SotO turtles was a lot more expressive, they did look a bit too cartoony for my taste, personally I prefer the designs of the first movie, they felt a lot more reeal.

[Slade]

I prefer the 90's version myself. I could always tell they looked different, but then again, everything about SOTO and the original look different.

http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/comicsalliance.com/files/2010/04/turtlemovie.jpg


http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/thefw.com/files/2013/02/TMNT2.jpg

it may be the quality of the pic, but it looks like these actually have nostrils.

[Wildcat]

Ive honestly never noticed there was a difference. I still don't. I like both.

TMNT 3 was extremely obvious though.

[pdizzle]

I defenitly prefer the first movies looks over soto. Then again I think I might be the only turtle fan to be diapointed by soto in general......

[TrickOrTreater]

I defenitly prefer the first movies looks over soto. Then again I think I might be the only turtle fan to be diapointed by soto in general......

Here's how I look at it.

The first movie was a great combination of both Mirage and the original cartoon.

Secret of the Ooze was a great adaptation of the original cartoon.

Makes it a lot more enjoyable if viewed that way.

[pdizzle]

Here's how I look at it.

The first movie was a great combination of both Mirage and the original cartoon.

Secret of the Ooze was a great adaptation of the original cartoon.

Makes it a lot more enjoyable if viewed that way.
This is a great point. The movie its self was ok, although very boring. I guess its just a huge dissapointment when a movie sets a standard and then instead of building on its great start they tear down from it instead. Though given the times, its just what movie companys did so I dont hold it against them. Like for example, companys make a hit then quickly capitalize on by slaping together a sequal without any real effort. Dont get me wrong soto did a much better job then other sequals of the 90s but my point still stands. The third one would be a better example of this however. Anyway your point is still a good one and looking at it from this stand point does make it easier to accept and enjoy.....

[turtlefanforever]

i liked them equally, you cant expect things to be so serious or so strict to the comic or you'll never enjoy anything. up at this point we are use to change but theres still people who dont handle it well. given theres examples of too much change with all the new stuff thats out i think the second did the right amount

[Powder]

Ok, but I'm talking about the visual aesthetic. They changed distinctly for people with an eye for detail. To me they weren't as gritty, plausible, or nuanced looking.

Given how easily the suits were damaged, how heavy they'd become after absorbing sweat, etc, they needed a LOT of them. The simpler designs of SOTO were muuuuuch easier to produce in bulk, that's why they were changed.

[The Boston Ninja Turtle]

powder i am taking over this thread for a second to say everytime i see your sig i want to cosplay that donnie

[Cipher]

Then again I think I might be the only turtle fan to be diapointed by soto in general......
No way. Secret of the Ooze doesn't hold up at all. The only thing that keeps me sitting through it on (very infrequent) rewatches is fond memories from my childhood. I think I actually prefer the third one.

Per the thread, the suits are about a toss-up in my mind. I think I slightly prefer the first movie's though, because I think, as someone else stated, they look a little less cartoony. (I think I attribute this to the prominent, slightly cartoony looking spots on the second movie's costumes, in addition to it seeming like their heads are larger in comparison to the slimmed-down suits.)

It's not something I've really thought about before, though.

[CyberCubed]

II holds up fine if you think of it as a live action cartoon.

[Andrew NDB]

The SOTO suits were light years better than the first movie suits in every way. In fact, the SOTO suits are the best Turtle suits we've ever gotten. That said, in the movie the way they were being lit in every scene bathed them in way too much light, giving them a very light-hearted "feel."

[1984TMNT]

Ok, but I'm talking about the visual aesthetic. They changed distinctly for people with an eye for detail. To me they weren't as gritty, plausible, or nuanced looking.

I second this. The 90 suits were just so much more believable. Lots of things were over done in SOTO, especially the facial expressions (Leo/Donnie) specifically. Mikey is the only one that is fairly close to his original counterpart.

[CinematicESP]

The SOTO suits were light years better than the first movie suits in every way. In fact, the SOTO suits are the best Turtle suits we've ever gotten. That said, in the movie they way they were being lit in every scene bathed them in way too much light, giving them a very light-hearted "feel."

This.

While I do like the gritty feel of the first movie suits, the SOTO ones moved more fluidly and just looked better overall. Especially Donnie, who looked (and sounded) like a gross, fat stoner frog in the first movie. Between the weird look and the miscasting of Corey Feldman, everything about Donnie's characterization seemed wrong. The second one always felt much more appropriate to me.

SOTO also had the best looking Splinter.

[ProactiveMan]

I remember reading in a book about Jim Henson Creature Shop, that the servos and things for the facial control system in the first movie were housed in the shell, and cables ran up the neck, into the head. In the second move they had access to smaller components, so they could contain it all in the head itself, and as a result, the heads in Secrete of the Ooze are bigger in comparison to the body. I could be wrong about that though.

[Warhorse]

Well, I always liked Leo's and Mikey's suit from the first movie best, but Raph and Don's suit from the second one best.

[Shark_Blade]

Mikey from the first movie is the best one imo.

[Commenter 42]

The functionality of the suit's improved. Absolutely. But as others have said all the mechanics were held in the head as opposed to the shell like the first. So they slimmed down the body suits, yet the heads got larger. Expressions got bigger, in combo with brighter lighting ... heavy handed coloring, and spots. The SOTO suits ended up looking much more cartoon like.

Not that they didn't look good, however.

But I thought the size, and proportions of the '90 Turtles look better. They had better lighting, obviously, but the aesthetic design of the Turtles themselves was better IMO. Better coloring, nuances like Raph's scar, etc. Plus the eyes were smaller, and the bandanas were dirty. They felt worn, and lived in. It gave them a much more plausible feel.

I agree with everything you've said. Some people don't notice or care about the subtleties and nuances that were sculpted into the faces of the first film, but I was equally let down by SOTO. The Turtles weren't the only aspect to lose their character, the city lost all it's flavor, and yes, the lighting was abysmal. The only saving grace was a new, decidedly more attractive, April.

[Bmaga123]

Well, I always liked Leo's and Mikey's suit from the first movie best, but Raph and Don's suit from the second one best.

Exact opposite for me on this but overall I still prefer the original movie looks as they look and feel more realistic and the paint jobs are much more detailed IMO. The animatronics are better in SOTO for sure and I still enjoy the look of the turtles but the first movie suits will always be my favorite :tcool:

[Bmaga123]

The functionality of the suit's improved. Absolutely. But as others have said all the mechanics were held in the head as opposed to the shell like the first. So they slimmed down the body suits, yet the heads got larger. Expressions got bigger, in combo with brighter lighting ... heavy handed coloring, and spots. The SOTO suits ended up looking much more cartoon like.

Not that they didn't look good, however.

But I thought the size, and proportions of the '90 Turtles look better. They had better lighting, obviously, but the aesthetic design of the Turtles themselves was better IMO. Better coloring, nuances like Raph's scar, etc. Plus the eyes were smaller, and the bandanas were dirty. They felt worn, and lived in. It gave them a much more plausible feel.

Agreed 100% on everything you said.

[NYShell]

1990 Steve Barron version for me.

[electric_sheep]

http://xtreme-network.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/tmnt.jpg
http://mondocelluloid.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Teenage-Mutant-Ninja-Turtles-1990.jpg
first ones had more realistic textures to them, but besides that i can't see much of a deference...

[electric_sheep]

wow, that ****er was large, i apologies for that...

[Bmaga123]

First movie they had more of an overbite or beak if you will and in the second they didnt have this much other then Raph. Donatello's mouth did the opposite with an underbite and I never did care for that. The eyes appeared bigger and more cartooney in Soto and the paint jobs were simple and not as detailed as the first movie. The bandanna's were longer in SOTO but brighter in color because they were clean and not dirty like in the first movie. First movie had a much more realistic tone and will always be my favorite look.

[ProactiveMan]

Interestingly, I think the two different Donatello faces suite their respective voices. It's probably just because I've seen the movies so many times, but the original seems somewhat Feldmanesque to me. I can't imagine Corey Feldman's voice coming out of the SOTO Donatello; it suites Adam Carl's more rounded voice.

[Lou 500]

I like the ones from the first and second movie, especially for the details like the subtle yellow on their snouts to indicate a beak. I haven't seen the third one but from what I've seen of screenshots I don't like the spots they've got.

[Commenter 42]

in the first film Don looks as though he's thinking...
in the second he looks lobotomized.

[electric_sheep]

one thing i never liked about any movie is how the bandanas look...

[electric_sheep]

First movie they had more of an overbite or beak if you will and in the second they didnt have this much other then Raph. Donatello's mouth did the opposite with an underbite and I never did care for that. The eyes appeared bigger and more cartooney in Soto and the paint jobs were simple and not as detailed as the first movie. The bandanna's were longer in SOTO but brighter in color because they were clean and not dirty like in the first movie. First movie had a much more realistic tone and will always be my favorite look.
yeah, now i see it also in the second one they have more visible muscles
and they look way more like people wearing costumes than the first one...

[fridaynightdestination]

I prefer The Secret of the Ooze suits. The suits from the first movie are a little freaky IMO, the 2nd suits seem a lot more casual and cool.

[Commenter 42]

Freaky how?

[billbot85]

I loved the costume designs in both films, but I think I liked the costumes in the first film more since they weren't as cartoony. Nevertheless, both films' costumes were better than 3rd movie's by leaps and bounds.

[Leo656]

I like 'em both pretty good. I agree with those who have said the originals had more texture to them, and I prefer the overall "look" of that movie, but the sequel's suits were obviously more functional and streamlined for an overall more pleasing appearance to the eye. I whole-heartedly agree with Andrew, though, that SotO was entirely too brightly lit. (I also promise not to make agreeing with Andrew any kind of habit :P)

The third movie suits were the most functional as far as movement, but holy geez, did they look like ass. 60s-era Godzilla kinds of Bad.

[goodfellaray]

in the first film Don looks as though he's thinking...
in the second he looks lobotomized.

hahahahaha

Going with the original. From head to toe, it's my preferred choice.

[CowabungaMikey]

I prefer movie 3. They look so real.






Nah just messing with ya movie 1 for me

[slingtheory]

I prefer the first movie myself for all the reasons chucker mentioned. They were grimey and dirty with noticable battle scars and even different body types. Those designs had little nuances and details that helped sell the idea that these guys were real and had been around for 15 years living in a sewer. For the sequel they literally cleaned them up to make them more kid friendly along with everything else in the movie. While i do agree the new suits functioned better i wish they couldve kept some of the original design because it made them look more like living creatures with a history.

[Raphael232]

the first ones were better but only slightly because SOTO were slightly different from them.