David Wise - Self Plagiarist

[Jester]

From his article on the Transformers wiki:
Recycle-o-matic

David Wise frequently recycled concepts and ideas from older work for use in later scripts. As a result, many Transformers set pieces, concepts and even plots wound up appearing in other series, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles in particular, while many other ideas seem to have actually started life as plots for earlier series, such as He-Man and the Masters of the Universe.

Which Transformers stories were recycled? Wellll...

"Attack of the Autobots" — Recycled for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles episode "Slash - The Evil Turtle from Dimension X" (specifically, the rocket chase sequence during the climax).
"Day of the Machines" — Recycled from the He-Man and the Masters of the Universe episode "Day of the Machines" (specifically, the computer program that takes over other machines). Later recycled for the Defenders of the Earth episode "Audie and Tweak" (specifically, an evil supercomputer—represented by a giant ugly face on a screen—that remotely controls or influences other machines and taunts the heroes as they enter its lair), The New Adventures of Speed Racer episode "B.O.S.S." (specifically, an evil computer system controlling other machines by placing remote command devices on them), and the Mighty Ducks episode "The Return of Dr. Droid" (specifically, an evil computer that takes control of various machines and makes them attack the heroes).
"Microbots" — Recycled from the He-Man and the Masters of the Universe episode "Day of the Machines" (specifically, the sequence where a character shrinks down and enters a machine to fix/sabotage it). Recycled again for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles episode "Shredder & Splintered".
"Kremzeek!" — Recycled from the He-Man and the Masters of the Universe episode "Day of the Machines" (specifically, the little energy-based monster that makes trouble). Later recycled almost completely for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles episode "The Big ZIPP Attack", and once again for The Mighty Ducks episode "Zap Attack". Also recycled for the Defenders of the Earth episode "Audie and Tweak" (specifically, the heroes' computer babbling nonsensically after being affected by an outside force).
"Auto-Bop" — Recycled for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles episode "Corporate Raiders from Dimension X" (specifically, the villains brainwashing people in New York to build a doomsday device via a phony business).
"The Girl Who Loved Powerglide" — Recycled wholesale for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles episode "Poor Little Rich Turtle" (specifically, every character, motivation and set piece).
"Trans-Europe Express" — Recycled for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles episode "Hot Rodding Teenagers from Dimension X" (specifically, the weather machine that goes out of control in the climax and has to be destroyed in midair).
"The Rebirth, Part 3" - Recycled for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles episode "Shredder & Splintered" (specifically, the circumstances where Galvatron and Lord Zarak bicker over leadership being nearly identically reused for Krang and Shredder, right down to the dialogue, "We shall see...").
I knew about Shredded and Splintered, or the Shredder is Splintered...or what ever this episode is titled...but man that's a lot of recycling.

Talk about going green....

[d_osborn]

Work smarter, not harder. :-)

[IndigoErth]

Okay, now some things I can take as just tropes cartoons commonly do/did (i.e. so many shrink a character at least once), but a lot of that is awfully specific to a lazy degree. lol

Maybe it was partly a tactic for meeting deadlines sometimes.

[neatoman]

Work smarter, not harder. :-)

In this case it's just lazy, it's not like writing a 20 page script that you don't even intend to rewrite takes that long.

[CyberCubed]

Didn't all old cartoons from the 80's ripoff each other? Not to mention most eps of the old toon are parodies of popular movies at the time. Rex-1 is Robocop, we have a Terminator in that Season 6 episode, we have Rando in New York who is Rambo, we have shrinking turtles like honey I shrunk the kids, we have eps with giant bugs, etc.

[Original TMNT Cartoon Fan]

Didn't all old cartoons from the 80's ripoff each other? Not to mention most eps of the old toon are parodies of popular movies at the time. Rex-1 is Robocop, we have a Terminator in that Season 6 episode, we have Rando in New York who is Rambo, we have shrinking turtles like honey I shrunk the kids, we have eps with giant bugs, etc.

A lot of fiction, especially science fiction and fantasy, consists of ripoffs. Just think of Masters of the Universe (and Blackstar), more or less Star Wars recycled.

[neatoman]

Didn't all old cartoons from the 80's ripoff each other? Not to mention most eps of the old toon are parodies of popular movies at the time. Rex-1 is Robocop, we have a Terminator in that Season 6 episode, we have Rando in New York who is Rambo, we have shrinking turtles like honey I shrunk the kids, we have eps with giant bugs, etc.

The problem with David Wise isn't similar scenarios or parodies, it's the same exact scenarios and directly lifted scenes. It can't be dismissed as coincidence or jokes. The fact that he's the common writer of these episodes further hammers that in.

[sdp]

If anything this goes to show how something similar can be very different depending on the show/characters/dialog/alterations. I find that far more interesting than someone recycling his old scripts which isn't plagiarism just lazyness. I really have no issue with it except with David Wise claims he made TMNT what they are today but whatever. A story depending on how it's told also depends on whether it's a good or bad story.

[Voltron]

Well, it apparently worked. I agree with d_osborn on this one. If I'm on a schedule and have to turn out scripts for toy commercials, I'd be tempted to do it, too.

I wonder how many of these writers were really interested in writing thought out, character driven stories?

[neatoman]

If anything this goes to show how something similar can be very different depending on the show/characters/dialog/alterations. I find that far more interesting than someone recycling his old scripts which isn't plagiarism just lazyness. I really have no issue with it except with David Wise claims he made TMNT what they are today but whatever. A story depending on how it's told also depends on whether it's a good or bad story.

Well, it apparently worked. I agree with d_osborn on this one. If I'm on a schedule and have to turn out scripts for toy commercials, I'd be tempted to do it, too.

I wonder how many of these writers were really interested in writing thought out, character driven stories?

The thing about David Wise's attitude that really bugs is that he has the gall to claim virtually everything about TMNT that people like is his idea, when he clearly didn't have enough passion for them to write original scripts. I wouldn't have much of a problem if he was honest about not really giving a crap, or at least if he just claimed to have had "fun" writing the show. But as is he's taking credit for things we know Kevin and Peter made, which I can't let slide. Not that any sensible person would ever believe him, every piece of TMNT media ever says and will continue to say "Based on characters created by Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird" somewhere, but still...

And even taking Kevin and Peter out of the equation, there's no way David Wise was nearly as influential as he claims to be. We know most of the original characters in season 1 were created by Playmates, they wouldn't have had toys so early on otherwise, there's even proof that Bebop and Rocksteady were designed by Peter Laird. We also know that Playmates were in possession of documents made by Mirage, explaining the characters' personalities in a simplified way, meaning David Wise wasn't really responsible for turning the Turtles into simplified archetypes either. We know that the actors also improvised lines from the very start, meaning a lot of the dialogue and humor wasn't written by him. And finally we know that Kevin and Peter vetoed several major aspects of the season 1 scripts, meaning that there's a good chance any original ideas he had were removed before the recording/animation even started.

From were I sit it's entirely possible (if not probable) that all David Wise did was to glue together a bunch of backstories and concepts supplied by other people, kinda the writing equivalent of assembling IKEA furniture.

[Voltron]

I can't speak to Wise's attitude. I'd give credit to Eastman and Laird and to the fans for making the biggest difference.

I was referring to recycling stories and being lazy. That worked. Did it elevate TMNT into something it wouldn't have otherwise been? Probably not, no.

[Leo656]

Multiple things can be true at once.

The style of working utilized by Wise and others back in the 80s (and still very much seen in movies and TV shows today) was definitely... "efficient", if we're being kind. And there's ultimately nothing wrong with it. To put it in wrestling parlance, it's like guys who are going to wrestle each other every night for the next month doing 99% the same match around the loop rather than try and do a brand new one every night. If you've gotta do a hundred of these in a row, in short order, then why kill yourself? If you've got a working formula, then "rubber-stamping" it simply makes sense. Nobody in the moment is ever wondering how the marks are gonna suddenly notice and start whining about it 30 years later. It's just a job. And ANY job is ultimately about maximizing one's own rewards while minimizing the effort. In this, the man's hardly unique.

BUT. I've seen him enough on social media to attest that either he's a genuine tw*t or does a very good impression of one. Never spoken to him myself - no point - but I've seen plenty of how he engages with others, and I can say with confidence that any sort of interaction we would potentially have would be very brief and no fun for either side.

In summation, he can be both a smart worker and a nitwit. It doesn't have to be all one or the other.

[oldmanwinters]

*plagiarist

:trolleye: :trazz:

[Leo656]

*plagiarist

:trolleye: :trazz:

I know, right? :lol: But he's one'a the Suits, so I wasn't gonna say anything. :trazz:

[pferreira]

From were I sit it's entirely possible (if not probable) that all David Wise did was to glue together a bunch of backstories and concepts supplied by other people, kinda the writing equivalent of assembling IKEA furniture.Wise was heavily involved in getting the show on screen. His comments about creating the show are shaky considering the evidence and point of view but the reason TMNT annoyed him over the years was the lack of recognition he got for keeping the series a success which in turn made the franchise popular. Putting aside his creation claims he was responsible for the scripts that made up Season 1. He was responsible for bringing all that together in a cohesive way. Not just that...he also was responsible for writing half the series which is A LOT of episodes. If I was putting that much work into the show and getting treated like any other hired hand I'd be quite rightly pis*ed off as he has been.

David definitely exaggerated things but his commitment to TMNT cannot be overstated and unfortunately the man will never live to see any recognition he really deserves, only people like yourself calling him a hack. What a sad legacy... :cry:

[neatoman]

Being dead doesn't retroactively make his writing better or his bizarre claims more reasonable. Yes he wrote 37% of the episodes and it's understandable why he might have felt he deserved more credit, but that does not justify fabricating a false narrative.

At the end of the day, TMNT is Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird's creation. It's their ideas that make up the core of what TMNT is, not David Wise's. And as evidenced by versions largely ignoring his ideas finding success, it's possible that his ideas just weren't behind the show's popularity.

[oldmanwinters]

Heh, enjoy!

NUfQRFv2t2U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUfQRFv2t2U

ZQOt0BR8pP8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQOt0BR8pP8

[neatoman]

Heh, enjoy!

NUfQRFv2t2U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUfQRFv2t2U

ZQOt0BR8pP8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQOt0BR8pP8

Yup, clear cut examples indeed.

[pferreira]

Being dead doesn't retroactively make his writing better or his bizarre claims more reasonable.Someone doesn't need to be dead in order to be appreciated if you already appreciate them. When Wise was alive I appreciated his writing but I knew he had a deep frustration and angriness over the way he was treated considering he put so much work into the series. He will never get to see that appreciation for his work on TMNT. You thing you don't understand yet is when someone is close to something they get very territorial and possessive of it. Is that good or bad? You complain David lied about his involvement in the series so that's bad but guess what? That's human nature. I'm not going to trash him when he was alive because I liked his work and I'm sure not going to trash the guy when he's no longer among us. :cry:

[neatoman]

Someone doesn't need to be dead in order to be appreciated if you already appreciate them. When Wise was alive I appreciated his writing but I knew he had a deep frustration and angriness over the way he was treated considering he put so much work into the series. He will never get to see that appreciation for his work on TMNT. You thing you don't understand yet is when someone is close to something they get very territorial and possessive of it. Is that good or bad? You complain David lied about his involvement in the series so that's bad but guess what? That's human nature. I'm not going to trash him when he was alive because I liked his work and I'm sure not going to trash the guy when he's no longer among us. :cry:

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. Yes I understand why he lied, but having sympathetic reasons for lying does not change that it was wrong of him to do that.

And I'm sorry, his role was still relatively minor at the end of the day. Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird created the TMNT, Jim Lawson and Ryan Brown added a few characters, Playmates Toys supplied additional concepts, the character designers and actors came in with their own ideas as well and finally Kevin/Peter made some revisions to Wise's scripts. Hell, officially speaking, David Wise isn't even credited as the sole writer of season 1! And hell, 63% of the show was appearently not made with his involvement at all. Nor did he ever get involved with TMNT outside of the show, his involvement ended in 1995.

In the 25 years between him having written his last TMNT script and his death, TMNT did just fine without him. And during the 10 year period Peter Laird was the sole owner, David Wise's ideas were deliberately ignored and TMNT still found success.

[pferreira]

Hell, officially speaking, David Wise isn't even credited as the sole writer of season 1! Which David explained while he was alive...:-?

In the 25 years between him having written his last TMNT script and his death, TMNT did just fine without him. And during the 10 year period Peter Laird was the sole owner, David Wise's ideas were deliberately ignored and TMNT still found success.I get it. You want to deny Wise had any involvement in the series by pretending he had zero effect on the success of the show unless it's stuff you don't like about it. You talk about Wise's ideas being completely ignored and Laird was the one to drive the series which is factually incorrect. The series was run by Wolf and David for a lot of its run. Laird and Eastman with Play mates approved ideas but Wise and FW set up a lot of what would happen in the series whether you like it or not. Yep, the network or PlayMates would ask for things to be added into the series but from experience we know the writers resisted. I might also add for all the criticisms of the campy tone you hate so much most of that was added by Jack Mendelsohn with Season 3. When David took over at script editor in Season 7 he got rid of most of that to give the show back its harder edge it began with.

I mean when looking at it from an objective way it's pretty delusional how you're seeing this you have to admit. You seem to have some personal beef with the guy based on the fact people are nostalgic towards the series. I'm sure the same people will argue the IDW writers are hacks in 30 years time as well. Just because you don't like the tone of the series doesn't make it bad. The 80's series was completely unfaithful to its source material in terms of tone and story but completely faithful in spirit of its source material. It's just not for you I get it but don't trash one guy who was a large part of that series creation. You could easily argue Jack Mendelsohn and Francis Moss took the series less seriously than Wise. I mean neatoman that bridge looks pretty unstable man. :roll:

[neatoman]

Which David explained while he was alive...:-?

I get it. You want to deny Wise had any involvement in the series by pretending he had zero effect on the success of the show unless it's stuff you don't like about it. You talk about Wise's ideas being completely ignored and Laird was the one to drive the series which is factually incorrect. The series was run by Wolf and David for a lot of its run. Laird and Eastman with Play mates approved ideas but Wise and FW set up a lot of what would happen in the series whether you like it or not. Yep, the network or PlayMates would ask for things to be added into the series but from experience we know the writers resisted. I might also add for all the criticisms of the campy tone you hate so much most of that was added by Jack Mendelsohn with Season 3. When David took over at script editor in Season 7 he got rid of most of that to give the show back its harder edge it began with.

I mean when looking at it from an objective way it's pretty delusional how you're seeing this you have to admit. You seem to have some personal beef with the guy based on the fact people are nostalgic towards the series. I'm sure the same people will argue the IDW writers are hacks in 30 years time as well. Just because you don't like the tone of the series doesn't make it bad. The 80's series was completely unfaithful to its source material in terms of tone and story but completely faithful in spirit of its source material. It's just not for you I get it but don't trash one guy who was a large part of that series creation. You could easily argue Jack Mendelsohn and Francis Moss took the series less seriously than Wise. I mean neatoman that bridge looks pretty unstable man. :roll:

Nothing you wrote here offers any real counter-argument to what I wrote.


I wrote "officially" in regards to writing season one. I know he claimed Patti Howeth wasn't really the co-writer but she is still credited as such, thereby "officially". And as already explained, Wise is not a reliable source, if I'll pretend I trust this word (instead of wanting to hear what Howeth said about it) the point still stands that she shares the writing credit. Find Howeth side of the story and we might be able to scratch it off entirely.

I never claimed Wise had zero effect on the success, I claimed there's little evidence to suggest his ideas primarily drove the success. Please make an actual argument for why something was indeed his idea and why it influenced the success of the show.

Laird did ignore David Wise's ideas, he even produced a cartoon with the purpose of resetting the franchise to more closely resemble what he and Eastman made. You don't say why that's wrong, you just say it is. Maybe you're implying that I made seem like I claimed Laird drove the Fred Wolf show, which would indeed be incorrect but I did not do that.

Yes, I know Fred Wolf and David Wise were the major heads behind the show but it's another thing I never said anything about.

I also never refuted that David Wise wasn't partially responsible for what happened in the show, of course he did, he's the writer. Again, you seem to misunderstand or purposely misrepresent my claim. My point is more that David Wise, Fred Wolf and the others working on the show were not the sole force behind it.

Yes, the writers might have resisted outside influence but that's also something I didn't make any claims about. And regardless of wheter or not they did, outside influence did still come into play. Point out instances of when it happened or what they had the ability to reject.

I also didn't refer to the campy tone or Jack Mendelsohn's writing. However, I did acknowledge that David Wise wasn't the sole writer, which does mean I indirectly admit to Jack Mendelsohn having influence. And of course that would strengthen my point that Wise's influence wasn't that great. Don't make arguments for your perceived opponent thinking they're against his point.

And what Wise did after Mendelsohn is not really relevant either, it doesn't really undo Mendelsohn's influence over the show. And we're going to make a point about campiness. And I'd hardly say Wise's own writing had much of a "hard edge" in the first place but I wasn't really discussing his style anyway.

I did not claim any "personal beef" with the guy. I do have problems with his lying because it's lying. Didn't your parents tell you why lying is bad? And his writing would be bad regardless of who likes it, there are objective measures for bad writing.

I did not talk about the tone of the show, you keep pointing to something that I didn't do. Regardless no, the tone does not make the show bad. I don't think I pointed it out here but there are plenty of reasons you can argue why the show wasn't good, such as choppy animation and continuity errors, none of which has to do with mere taste.

I'm also not sure what you mean by faithful in spirit. Again, the post I wrote does not make arguments about faithfulness, merely about Wise's lack of honesty and how much credit he actually deserves. Regardless, I don't see what "spirit" was retained, I'd classify Mirage TMNT as drama and the FW cartoon as a comedy. Even by your admission the show became campier under Jack Mendelsohn.


Again: Lying is wrong and should be called out when it's evident, sympathetic reasons are not an excuse. There are also reasons something can be bad beyond personal taste and the number of people who are nostalgic for it is not a counter-argument.

These are pretty simple points, it's a bad sign when you can't argue against them and have to resort to misrepresentation and empty refutations.

[Leo656]

Again: Lying is wrong and should be called out when it's evident, sympathetic reasons are not an excuse. There are also reasons something can be bad beyond outside of personal taste and the number of people who are nostalgic for it is not a counter-argument.

These are pretty simple points, it's a bad sign when you can't argue against them and have to resort to misrepresentation and empty refutations.

Yeah, but that's the gimmick.

I'm still shocked that he bothered to use "objective" in a sentence and got lucky that it's contextually accurate. If I had to guess beforehand I'd think he had no experience with the word, given the constant strawman rebuttals and whatnot in defense of something that simply ain't that great without the ol' Nostalgia Goggles.

But again... that's the gimmick.

[pferreira]

I'm still shocked that he bothered to use "objective" in a sentence and got lucky that it's contextually accurate. If I had to guess beforehand I'd think he had no experience with the word, given the constant strawman rebuttals and whatnot in defense of something that simply ain't that great without the ol' Nostalgia Goggles.If that's true then strange you're doing the exact same thing you accuse me of huh? ;)

I have to respond to some of these:

Wise is not a reliable source, if I'll pretend I trust this word (instead of wanting to hear what Howeth said about it) the point still stands that she shares the writing credit. Find Howeth side of the story and we might be able to scratch it off entirely.Yeah sure ask her. But why do I get the impression even if her story corroborated with Wise you wouldn't believe her?

Please make an actual argument for why something was indeed his idea and why it influenced the success of the show.You know what a script is don't you? :-?

Maybe you're implying that I made seem like I claimed Laird drove the Fred Wolf show, which would indeed be incorrect but I did not do that.You make it sound that Wise had no input on the series other than to write the stuff you dislike so yeah anybody would be confused by what you're saying.

My point is more that David Wise, Fred Wolf and the others working on the show were not the sole force behind it.By Eastman and Laird's own admission they stopped caring about the scripts after the first three or so years because the series wasn't going the way they wanted. They left Fred and David to their own devices.

I also didn't refer to the campy tone or Jack Mendelsohn's writing. However, I did acknowledge that David Wise wasn't the sole writer, which does mean I indirectly admit to Jack Mendelsohn having influence. And of course that would strengthen my point that Wise's influence wasn't that great. Don't make arguments for your perceived opponent thinking they're against his point.Not once in your criticisms have I ever heard you complain and moan about Jack Mendelsohn or Francis Moss who were responsible for a considerable amount of the series episodes as well. You put all your criticisms only ever on Wise and Wolf. At least know who's responsible for what before criticising someone. Or does that go against your narrative. Also where in this thread did I say David was the creator of the entire franchise? He influenced the series yes but not exclusively.

And what Wise did after Mendelsohn is not really relevant either, it doesn't really undo Mendelsohn's influence over the show. And we're going to make a point about campiness. And I'd hardly say Wise's own writing had much of a "hard edge" in the first place but I wasn't really discussing his style anyway.You criticise his 'style' in every single thread that mentions the frickin TV show dude! It's boring! Not sure why you bothered to offer your condolences to a guy you have zero respect for. Curious behaviour I must say. :roll:

I did not claim any "personal beef" with the guy. I do have problems with his lying because it's lying. Didn't your parents tell you why lying is bad? And his writing would be bad regardless of who likes it, there are objective measures for bad writing.Really because I thought his writing was pretty damn good. Ask fans of other TV shows he's written for and they'll say the same. I know David was your punch bag but you need to let go. It's over, he's gone.

Regardless, I don't see what "spirit" was retained, I'd classify Mirage TMNT as drama and the FW cartoon as a comedy. Even by your admission the show became campier under Jack Mendelsohn.That's pretty much while you fail to understand the 80's series. You cannot appreciate something outside of your own contemporary viewing, Dude, you sill have your precious IDW comic and one day people will call the IDW writers bad writers as well except unlike you I can appreciate to some extent what they're doing without taking potshots EVERY SINGLE thread. The man is gone and he won't be alive to defend himself, not that it matters for close minded individuals such as yourself.

[Leo656]

:lol: What?

Brother, I've been the one person here who's been more than patient with you whenever we've spoken, but that's over, since now you're gonna start taking swings at me of all people. You're a loon with an ax to grind and nothing more, as far as I'm concerned. I don't think you mean anyone any specific harm but you're definitely "off."

I used to feel really bad when people would joke/imply that you were "detained" in some fashion, given your hyper-obsessive posting style and oddly specific posting schedule, because such insinuations are kind of mean, but now I'm starting to wonder.

Have fun with those windmills, Don Quixote.

[neatoman]

If that's true then strange you're doing the exact same thing you accuse me of huh? ;)

I have to respond to some of these:

Yeah sure ask her. But why do I get the impression even if her story corroborated with Wise you wouldn't believe her?

You know what a script is don't you? :-?

You make it sound that Wise had no input on the series other than to write the stuff you dislike so yeah anybody would be confused by what you're saying.

By Eastman and Laird's own admission they stopped caring about the scripts after the first three or so years because the series wasn't going the way they wanted. They left Fred and David to their own devices.

Not once in your criticisms have I ever heard you complain and moan about Jack Mendelsohn or Francis Moss who were responsible for a considerable amount of the series episodes as well. You put all your criticisms only ever on Wise and Wolf. At least know who's responsible for what before criticising someone. Or does that go against your narrative. Also where in this thread did I say David was the creator of the entire franchise? He influenced the series yes but not exclusively.

You criticise his 'style' in every single thread that mentions the frickin TV show dude! It's boring! Not sure why you bothered to offer your condolences to a guy you have zero respect for. Curious behaviour I must say. :roll:

Really because I thought his writing was pretty damn good. Ask fans of other TV shows he's written for and they'll say the same. I know David was your punch bag but you need to let go. It's over, he's gone.

That's pretty much while you fail to understand the 80's series. You cannot appreciate something outside of your own contemporary viewing, Dude, you sill have your precious IDW comic and one day people will call the IDW writers bad writers as well except unlike you I can appreciate to some extent what they're doing without taking potshots EVERY SINGLE thread. The man is gone and he won't be alive to defend himself, not that it matters for close minded individuals such as yourself.

Again, what is this incoherent nonsense you're trying to argue here?


I would not have a problem with Howeth claiming she wasn't involved. Again, it's the credibility of David Wise that is in question, not hers.


Being the script writer is not a sure way of knowing who is responsible for ideas in the final product. Leigh Brackett is credited as one of two writers on the Empire Strikes Back, but we know she wrote the script based on an outline from Lucas and what she wrote was heavily re-written by Kasdan, very little of what she added actually ended up in the final movie. Her script is actually pretty easy to find, go read that and compare to the movie. David Wise probably did come up with his own ideas for season one, nobody is refuting that possibility. The problem is that we know for a fact that some things came from the comic or had been conceptualized by Playmates, some of which Wise falsely claimed to be responsible for. This is why it's hard to tell what actually is his ideas or not, even when there's no evidence to point to another source.


If by "no input beyond stuff I don't like" you mean the show itself, then that is indeed correct. He had no direct input in TMNT beyond that show, some of his material ended up getting reworked into the early issues of the Archie series and children's books but that is not direct input. He did probably create characters and concepts used by other writers (also not direct input but it would be a clear example of his influence), but like I've already stated, it's hard to tell what was actually created by him. Again, this is a gross misrepresentation of my argument.


Yes, it's true that Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird did not get involved much with the show, we all know that. But again, they're not the only outside influences. We know concepts and characters pushed for by Playmates did end up in the show, clear cut examples of the showrunners not having full control.


I haven't criticized Jack Mendelsohn or Francis Moss because I don't know if they have lied like David Wise did. And I am not aware of them doing shady things like making minor edits to already sold scripts. Just taking a look at what scripts they wrote; I can see some questionable creative decisions but their combined writing credit is less than 25 episodes. There's not as much to criticize and none of it goes beyond writing quality. And I don't think I've ever criticized David Wise for something he didn't write, where is this coming from?


And no, nobody claimed David Wise was solely responsible for either show or the franchise as a whole, that's yet another argument you pull from nowhere. You're literally making the same point I am and act as we don't agree in that regard, it's strange that you don't grasp this.


You or other people liking David Wise's writing is not an argument, it's an appeal to popularity fallacy. You have to be able to argue for the writing itself, an example would be to (successfully) argue why it's not sloppy writing to have Shredder mutate the Turtles some time after getting the Technodrome but then seemingly wait months if not years to use said Technodrome to take over the world. You can't just say "that's just like your opinion, man" or make excuses outside of what's established in the show itself. For this particular example you'd have to point to a scene where something addressing the issue occurs, like an explicit claim that it was under construction or that Shredder somehow got the mutagen before encountering the Technodrome. The writing has to be able to stand on its own, defenses for it ought to be arguments for why it can, not excuses because you happen to like it.


The final point you're trying to make here is a straight up strawman. Nothing here explains how the show retained the spirit of the comic, all you do is accuse me of being unable "appreciate something outside of my own contemporary viewing" and saying that there will be critics of the IDW comic in a few decades, which is irrelevant. The quality of the IDW comic has nothing to with whether or not the Fred Wolf show works as an adaptation. And the flaws of the IDW comic are not the flaws of the Fred Wolf show, they're not interchangeable and they both have to be able to stand on their own.

[Hamato Yoshi]

Both MASK and Duck Tales had a plot about metal eating mites......

[Leo656]

"And why do we call these 'masks'? This is a helmet... not a mask..." :trazz:

"M.A.S.K.! Do they know... 'Command' doesn't start with a K?" :lol:

[ZariusTwo]

I wonder how many of these writers were really interested in writing thought out, character driven stories?

A lot, considering these so-called "toy commercials" are still fondly remembered for their characters and concepts.

But hey, don't let fans like me get in the way of revisionist history from cringe culture advocates.

[neatoman]

A lot, considering these so-called "toy commercials" are still fondly remembered for their characters and concepts.

But hey, don't let fans like me get in the way of revisionist history from cringe culture advocates.

There's no natural link between fond memories and the writer's investment. A child does not have very high standards and can very easily remember things as better than they were when they're adults, or the memories could be straight up warped to be more positive than the actual experience, the latter even happens later in life. When it comes to writer investment, it is true that more investment will result in a less flawed product, it also true that creating something that is good enough for first impressions or someone who isn't expected to think too hard about it, isn't really that difficult. And as established, characters/concepts found in merchendise driven cartoons are often the creations of someone other than the writers.

[Leo656]

Fair points on either side.

To me, I find that it's really mostly our young, impressionable minds that create those powerful memories. And whether or not they "hold up" depends a lot on how frequently we revisit those things, although it varies by individual. Objectively, it's very rare that I revisit an old cartoon, TV show, movie or comic book that I loved as a pre-10 year old, and find that it's still JUST as good as it was then. More often, I find that it's "alright" but I can see how my young, flexible imagination filled in a lot of holes and made things seem grander and more epic than they truly were. For example, I just this morning finally found the name of a song I remembered listening to daily as a kid, but haven't heard in about 20 years, so I decided to look it up, and it sounds nothing at all like I remembered; not necessarily Better or Worse, but completely different.

There's also the matter of how much we, as individuals, are willing to overlook or forgive when it comes to something we care about. I'm a huge He-Man fan, for example, and I do still enjoy most of the old episodes without irony, but at the same time, I'm under no illusion whatsoever that the scriptwriters actually sat down and agonized over these things, trying to tell the best possible story. That simply isn't true, they were churned out to meet a deadline and in many cases it shows. Is it forgivable given the circumstances of cranking out episodes for daily syndication? Sure, I think that it's fine to grade on a curve in some situations such as era, contemporary limitations of the medium, etc. etc., but even most of the people who wrote for these older cartoon shows openly admit that what they were doing was mostly fluff.

And as neatoman said, 99% of the audience for these shows were NOT going to be watching them with a scrutinizing eye, and the writers and producers know that just as well now as they did back then, which is evident in the quality (or, as people our age might say, the lack thereof) of modern kids' shows. I maintain that the writing for kids' entertainment nowadays is actually a lot worse, and that they really do think that everyone watching these shows and movies is a moron, and that they actually did have more respect for the audience Back In My Day, but I'm sure a lot of people would dispute that as well and insist that it's gotten better.

Point being, kids of ANY era don't like things because they are necessarily Good, they like them because they're exposed to them and thus naturally develop a fondness for them because they become an uplifting part of one's daily routine. That's perfectly normal and natural. But it does not mean, however, that the creators were doing anything more than cashing a paycheck as easily and with as little effort as possible. Because that WAS the standard, and probably still is; some things will come out better than others, some things will hold up and some won't, but it ultimately has very little to do with the output of effort on the part of the creative team.

If even the people who made The Simpsons during their golden years can admit that they were mostly half-assing it and cutting corners whenever possible, then I think it only stands to reason that the people behind a show like TMNT weren't giving 100% effort, either. And that doesn't mean it was bad, that people shouldn't have liked it or that their mind was playing tricks on them or whatever, but there IS a strong nostalgic factor, and we as kids have always done most of the "heavy lifting" in elevating these shows from Harmless Filler to Epic Sagas in our imagination.

Happens in absolutely everything. Ever try to go back and watch an old horror movie that had you in tears as a 6-year old? You usually just laugh, now. You see things with a completely different set of eyes as an adult, and that's simply the way it is.

[neatoman]

You can make the argument for self plagiarism against any creative. Didn't Picasso so the same thing over and over? Or Van Gogh? Or just in the movieworld we have Tim Burton? Or James Cameron? Or Sam Raimi? Or John Carpenter? Or Scorsese? Spielberg? Guillermo DelToro? Wes Anderson? The Coen Brothers? Just some names who have recurring themes, tone, storylines and plot points/casting that turns up in their work, again and again.

Uh, no. Here's the thing, there's a fundamental difference between James Cameron giving Terminator 2 obvious callbacks to the original, and what David Wise in regards to his writing.

Terminator 2 lifts lines from the original (I'll be back, Come with me if you want to live, etc) and creates similar (though clearly very different) scenes in an effort to make the audience think "oh, I remember that!". Being able to recognise what is going on is part of the craft, it still intentionally deviates a lof from the earlier creation in order to keep the audience invested. Similar but clearly different, that is the point here. It's also worth pointing out that this particular example is about as extreme as it gets when it comes to the creators you picked, and I pretty much already explained that it is intentional because it's a sequel. Just to compare, here are two scenes.
jBLo-kz_7h8
Mhkv2sL2Uxw
And yes, the "CWMIYWTL" moment happens later but that scene itself is much more different, harldy worth pointing out why it's different. Then some of the others like Scorsese, you point to style and themes, which is not the same as re-using writing at all. A script is something you can physically copy, a style being reused is more abstract. And a theme like "crime bad" can take countless forms, you don't need to directly copy to have the same theme.


What David Wise did on the other hand was not an intentional callback, it's the same script re-used with minor tweaks. The scene below (thanks oldmanwinters for providing the videos earlier in this thread) about characters going inside the mechanical body of another, while it does have some differences in the surrounding context, is literally the same scene. The lines are basically the same and the scenarios only differ because of animator interpretation. The video below is an even worse case, it's basically the entire episode recycled. A very important distinction isn't that it's simply familiar, it's the same. Another key difference here is also the previously mentioned sequel factor. It can be fairly easy to assume that the audience for Terminator 2 were fans of Terminator 1, they're expected to recognise what's going on. Transformers and Ninja Turtles have nothing in common, you're not expected to be familiar with one before you watch the other, so they're not callbacks.
NUfQRFv2t2U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUfQRFv2t2U

ZQOt0BR8pP8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQOt0BR8pP8

And examples of him doing this were quite rampant. The link to the TFWIKI article (thank you Jester), provides a nice little list. And keep in mind, as that one's on a Transformers wiki, it only lists examples relevant to the Transformers franchise. There might actually be plenty of examples that have nothing to do with Transformers. Here are the examples listed, feel free to think of it as a watch list, just to make sure it's correct:

Attack of the Autobots (Transformers) -> Slash - The Evil Turtle from Dimension X (TMNT)
Day of the Machines (He-Man) -> Day of the Machines (Transformers) -> Audie and Tweak (Defenders of the Earth) -> B.O.S.S. (The New Adventures of Speed Racer) -> The Return of Dr. Droid (Mighty Ducks)
Day of the Machines (He-Man) (yes, again) ->Microbots (Transformers) -> Shredder & Splintered (TMNT)
Day of the Machines (He-Man) (yes, really) -> Kremzeek! (Transformers) -> The Big ZIPP Attack (TMNT) -> Zap Attack (Mighty Ducks)
Auto-Bop (Transformers) -> Corporate Raiders from Dimension X (TMNT)
The Girl Who Loved Powerglide (Transformers) -> Poor Little Rich Turtle (TMNT)
Trans-Europe Express (Transformers) -> Hot Rodding Teenagers from Dimension X (TMNT)
The Rebirth, Part 3 (Transformers) -> Shredder & Splintered (TMNT)


And again, these examples are only relevant to Transformers. There might be others out there.

I'm sorry if I'm making long posts in this thread but I keep seeing bad arguments here. Straw Men, Band Wagon fallacies, What-About-isms... Please, learn how to argue.

[neatoman]

You're right about that post being too long, I'm not reading all that and definitely not watching a bunch of youTube videos.
Also, maybe everyone is "bad" at arguing, because they're not as passionate about this issue, either way. It seems like you're really locked ino this opinion and anytime someone presents points, or just presents other talking points or possible issues to consider, you just say "NO!" then tell them they're bad at arguing based on your own personal, specific criteria, for what arguments can and can't be used for or against this topic, that we have no access to. I don't know what you want from this thread really?

Yes, David Wise is a big ol' plagiarist! You're right, we're all wrong, happy?

It's Jester who called David Wise a "Self Plagerist", not me. I wouldn't personally use such a term but what it's defined as is accurate. As for arguments, you do know what a fallacy is, right? There are guidelines for making good arguments and how to avoid bad ones. When a bad argument is spotted, it should be pointed out so you can learn from it.

Since by your own admission you're not going to carefully read my long explaination for why your argument was poor, here's a shorter one:
Your argument was bad because you tried to equate stylistic choices to a literal re-use of old material. If you want more detail, I already explained the difference.

As for the other bad arguments in this thread, ZariusTwo made an erroneous connection between fan engagement and writer interest, which is bad because because it assumes there's a tie between how the author and audience feel about the product. And pferreira... There's a lot of things wrong with how pferreira argues but the basic problems here are that he tries to argue that David Wise was important, that other writers derailed the show more than him and criticises his critics, none of which has to do with wheter or not he blatantly recycled material.

Come to think of it, despite your argument being bad, it's actually better than anything ZariusTwo and pferreira tried here. Because it does tackle the subject of this thread, it just ignores an important distinction.

[Leo656]

HAH! "You presented too much factual evidence in support of your position. I'm purposely going to completely ignore it so that I can remain willfully ignorant of the topic at hand. Anything besides be exposed to information that might possibly change my mind!" :lol:

Never, ever gets old. Snicker.

[neatoman]

HAH! "You presented too much factual evidence in support of your position. I'm purposely going to completely ignore it so that I can remain willfully ignorant of the topic at hand. Anything besides be exposed to information that might possibly change my mind!" :lol:

Never, ever gets old. Snicker.

Yeah, I must admit that it's annoying that he refuses to even read my argument for how James Cameron and David Wise differ...
It's not even that hard to understand, one relied on recognition to get the point across, the other assumed it would fly over your head.

[Leo656]

For what it's worth I think your arguments are generally fair and well-presented. I personally haven't seen anything said that wasn't true, just maybe things that people either don't want to hear or choose to take too personally.

People treat this show like it's their child and David Wise like he was their grandfather. Statements of fact are not insults to be taken personally, I don't get what the problem is. It's not like the shows weren't successful or popular or that people didn't or can't like them. But the guy recycled scripts. It's not like he was the only one, but it's a thing that happened. Oh well.

[Egon1982]

He did wrote some solid Batman TAS episodes

[oldmanwinters]

Hey we finally fixed the typo on this thread title! :tcool:

[Leo656]

Ha! My pedantic ass is overjoyed. :lol:

[pferreira]

I would not have a problem with Howeth claiming she wasn't involved. Considering you're obsessed with proving David Wise is worthless yeah I would be inclined to feel you have a bias.

Being the script writer is not a sure way of knowing who is responsible for ideas in the final product.Say whaaaat? Jack Mendelsohn was responsible for being in charge of Season 2, Wise was just a writer and you're putting the blame on Wise for the extra doses of humour? Wise was integral to the writing crew but he didn't have power over Mendelsohn. Mendelsohn was the one to make the decisions because he was the one keeping everybody's scripts in check which is what a script editor does.

but like I've already stated, it's hard to tell what was actually created by him. Again, this is a gross misrepresentation of my argument.You're looking for excuses to say David Wise wasn't integral to anything good in TMNT. Listen to yourself man.

We know concepts and characters pushed for by Playmates did end up in the show, clear cut examples of the showrunners not having full control.While Playmates would ask for characters to be represented in the cartoon this wasn't a situation like Transformers where Hasbro had final say on which characters appeared in each episode. See Ace Duck, the writers didn't care as did Fred Wolf (see the start of the Turtle Power doc)

I haven't criticized Jack Mendelsohn or Francis Moss because I don't know if they have lied like David Wise did.I can sum this up by saying it doesn't fit your narrative. Just be honest.

You have to be able to argue for the writing itself,According to YOUR opinion.

The quality of the IDW comic has nothing to with whether or not the Fred Wolf show works as an adaptation. And the flaws of the IDW comic are not the flaws of the Fred Wolf show, they're not interchangeable and they both have to be able to stand on their own.Yeah because the IDW comic never used any elements of the FW series for its own did it? That hole you're digging is crater by this point... :o

The problem is we have to rely on people who worked there at the time, not your own subjective opinion. A couple of times I've quoted people you've criticised because you didn't think I had an argument. It's obvious you have your own agenda but you can't say I'm talking out of my butt.

[pferreira]

Have fun with those windmills, Don Quixote.Whatever. I don't need your replies to make me feel okay. ;)

Uh, no. Here's the thing, there's a fundamental difference between James Cameron giving Terminator 2 obvious callbacks to the original, and what David Wise in regards to his writing.The original Terminator movie rips off a story by Harlan Ellison which he sued and won (drops mic).

Both MASK and Duck Tales had a plot about metal eating mites......No you see neatoman considers those rubbish cartoons because they're from the 80's. :roll:

A child does not have very high standardsSpeak for yourself. I still like almost everything I enjoyed as a kid thank you.

Come to think of it, despite your argument being bad, it's actually better than anything ZariusTwo and pferreira tried here. Because it does tackle the subject of this thread, it just ignores an important distinction.In other words:

https://media1.tenor.com/images/c6a4fa2e8f7a8c6b9956deafc61d0568/tenor.gif

[Wesley]

I’m only familiar with David Wise’s work on TMNT, Cadillacs and Dinosaurs and Batman: TAS, but it’s clear from the examples given in this thread that he did recycle scripts. Still enjoyed most episodes he wrote, though how much of the finished product was his own writing is debatable.

[neatoman]

Considering you're obsessed with proving David Wise is worthless yeah I would be inclined to feel you have a bias.

I explain that it Wise's and not her credibility that is in question, that sentence was really short and to the point. The only reason I see for you editing it out is to misrepresent me, like you clearly like to do.


Say whaaaat? Jack Mendelsohn was responsible for being in charge of Season 2, Wise was just a writer and you're putting the blame on Wise for the extra doses of humour? Wise was integral to the writing crew but he didn't have power over Mendelsohn. Mendelsohn was the one to make the decisions because he was the one keeping everybody's scripts in check which is what a script editor does.

That has nothing to do with the paragraph you're responding to here. You're basically making up a point I never made. You're the one the one who brought up Mendelsohn in the first place and I did not say anything about the added humour. Anything I said said about Mendelsohn or the added humour is because you brought it, and my response to that was that I'm not pointing out when Mendelsohn is lying or recycling scripts, because I don't if he did.

And the point you're trying to make here isn't even one I'm trying to refute, you're pulling it from thin air as if it's a counterargument to something I claimed, which is it isn't.


You're looking for excuses to say David Wise wasn't integral to anything good in TMNT. Listen to yourself man.

It's hard to tell because we don't have evidence for his claims and we know for a fact that some are straight up lies, the problem here is that he is not a credible source. How many times do I have to say this and how many times do I have to point out that his own words are not evidence that he's telling the truth? His claims have to be confirmed by others in order for us to be sure.


While Playmates would ask for characters to be represented in the cartoon this wasn't a situation like Transformers where Hasbro had final say on which characters appeared in each episode. See Ace Duck, the writers didn't care as did Fred Wolf (see the start of the Turtle Power doc)

But these characters did end up in the show, maybe they didn't have final say but it's clear they had influence.



I can sum this up by saying it doesn't fit your narrative. Just be honest.

I explained this, right there in plain text and a simple sentence. Your "just your narrative" response is one of your laziest attempts at a response as of yet, because it doesn't even attempt to warp what I said or pull something that vaguely resembles a point. If it turns Jack Mendelsohn or Francis Moss have blatantly lied about something, I will not try to blame David Wise about it.


According to YOUR opinion.

What I'm responding to there is your tendency to appeal to popularity. The reason you need to argue for why the writing itself is strong is because something being popular isn't an indication that it's well made or is otherwise of good quality. Here's an example that is more extreme than wheter or not someone likes a TV show but it gets the point across: "Mandy thinks about starting to smoke, everyone she knows smokes, except for her doctor. Her doctor says smoking will cause several serious health problems and has plenty of evidence to show that it will. Still curious, she asks 50 if they enjoy smoking and think she should, they all do. Since it's 50 to 1, she starts smoking, because clearly that's a good idea."

See the problem? Again, I know smoking and a cartoon aren't the same thing but the basic idea applies.


Yeah because the IDW comic never used any elements of the FW series for its own did it? That hole you're digging is crater by this point... :o

Not really my point either. It's yet another thing I shouldn't have to explain but here goes, the Fred Wolf cartoon and the IDW comic are not the same product. When there's bad writing or artwork in one, it does not bleed into the other. Wheter or not they share idea is not relevant to their individual quality.


The problem is we have to rely on people who worked there at the time, not your own subjective opinion. A couple of times I've quoted people you've criticised because you didn't think I had an argument. It's obvious you have your own agenda but you can't say I'm talking out of my butt.

The primary person you keep pointing to is David Wise and we know David Wise lied. It's not my subjective opinion that David Wise lied, we know he lied because his statements can be proven false by simply reading a comic book. There's no angle from which he was correct when we know for a fact that what he said was wrong. The only ways you'd believe him would either be ignorance or making up excuses. It almost seems like you want me to think his word somehow trumps both the evidence against him, as well as the people who contradict him. That is not how this works.


The original Terminator movie rips off a story by Harlan Ellison which he sued and won (drops mic).

An Outer Limits episode, I've seen it. There's not that much in common with with Terminator if you watch it. The only similarity is that a soldier from the future gets sent back in time. Where they differ is that in Terminator the soldier is sent back to prevent an assination that would lead to a total machine apocalypse, in the episode the soldier end up back in time by accident and learns the value of a life off the battlefield. The obvious similarities are few and superficial. And from what I can tell Harlan Ellison did not win any lawsuit either, he threatened to sue and they settled out of court. Basically, it was just cheaper and easier than fighting a legal battle. He might have won, given how they caved into his demands but that is an important distinction to make. Besides, my argument was about how two James Cameron stories being similar was different from when David Wise straight up resused scripts, not wheter or not they ripped off someone else, that's a different discussion.


Speak for yourself. I still like almost everything I enjoyed as a kid thank you.

... Uh... That's quite rare I'd say...
The statement says quite a lot on it's own, but find it amusing that you appeal to the popularity of things most men your age admit to either have lost interest in a long time ago or haven't bothered to check out since childhood.


In other words:

https://media1.tenor.com/images/c6a4fa2e8f7a8c6b9956deafc61d0568/tenor.gif

I did say why his argument is better, because it's actually on topic, it doesn't dance around the topic to make irrelevant points.

[Hamato Yoshi]

There are decent toons today too : Fireman Sam , Rasmus Klump , Mr Bean , Garfield......not everything is bad

[Hamato Yoshi]

"And why do we call these 'masks'? This is a helmet... not a mask..." :trazz:

"M.A.S.K.! Do they know... 'Command' doesn't start with a K?" :lol:

Same with Mortal Kombat

[Leo656]

Whatever. I don't need your replies to make me feel okay. ;)


Speak for yourself. I still like almost everything I enjoyed as a kid thank you.


Re: Quoted Line #2 - I am shocked. :lol: It's not every day that you encounter a person who brags about having undergone absolutely zero personal or intellectual growth since they were a child, but then nothing about this place shocks me anymore. If you're genuinely thrilled about still seeing things through the eyes of a five year old, and find that to be something to be proud of, well... I guess whoever said "Ignorance is Bliss" was well and truly correct.

Re: Quoted Line #1 - Good, judging by your posting history there's most likely an entire regiment of small pills designed to do that, so I'm glad you don't need me. :trazz:

You are very much "not okay", sir. I've seen you carry on this whole "The FW cartoon was perfect"/"No, it really wasn't"/"Yes it WAS you big meanie!" crusade for years now, and it's almost the only thing you post about, at least at any length.

This thoroughly mediocre cartoon show from 25+ years ago is not your child to defend, it belongs to "the world" by this point and they can judge it however they want to. Lots of them don't love it anymore. Get over it. I don't think anyone here is entertained by this circle-jerk anymore. If you simply can't handle the fact that people say objectively-true "negative" things about a kids' show, then you're better off going to the TMNT FB page where any criticism whatsoever is not allowed. That seems much more your speed.

Same with Mortal Kombat

It's a Robot Chicken joke. They have riffed on M.A.S.K. several times, which is the only reason anyone remembers it nowadays.

[pferreira]

That has nothing to do with the paragraph you're responding to here. You're basically making up a point I never made. You're the one the one who brought up Mendelsohn in the first place and I did not say anything about the added humour. Anything I said said about Mendelsohn or the added humour is because you brought it, and my response to that was that I'm not pointing out when Mendelsohn is lying or recycling scripts, because I don't if he did.You're complaining about the quality of the writing, especially the humour and I point to Jack Mendelsohn taking over as being the one to incorporate humour. You're confusing myself and yourself in an attempt to say I don't know what I'm talking about which I do.

It's hard to tell because we don't have evidence for his claims and we know for a fact that some are straight up lies, the problem here is that he is not a credible source. How many times do I have to say this and how many times do I have to point out that his own words are not evidence that he's telling the truth? His claims have to be confirmed by others in order for us to be sure.Yet you've complain generally about the writers and Fred Wolf's intentions for the series and when I provide evidence you conveniently forget and instead come up with threads like "why did David Wise plagiarise Superman" which is just desperate. Doesn't matter what you believe Wise tells you, you don't believe anyone associated with that series because you hate it! :roll:

But these characters did end up in the show, maybe they didn't have final say but it's clear they had influence.Not all. Maybe half or just over did. compare that to Transformers when pretty certain 99% of all characters in the toyline appeared because of Hasbro. The writers really didn't care about including toys, neither did Fred Wolf as previously stated. You're grasping at straws without correlating evidence around it.

Your "just your narrative" response is one of your laziest attempts at a response as of yetYou aren't listening because you have your fingers in your ears that's why I say it doesn't fit your narrative.

See the problem? Again, I know smoking and a cartoon aren't the same thing but the basic idea applies.No, the only problem I see is you turning your revisionist narrative into an objective fact because you don't like something.

it does not bleed into the other.So you deny rather noticeable aspects of the IDW comic which you love if it's related to the Fred Wolf cartoon series. Remember what I said about bias?

we know he lied because his statements can be proven false by simply reading a comic book.No man I'm not saying you should have believed everything Wise said as fact. He was very close to the cartoon and as I mentioned before felt a lack of entitlement as a result. He exaggerated stuff about the creation of TMNT, we know that. However that doesn't mean he lied about EVERYTHING. His writing pals on the cartoon have tons of respect for him. If he was a liar would they feel that way? Check out his Facebook condolences, they ain't all from fans. It's an easy question to answer. :(

Besides, my argument was about how two James Cameron stories being similar was different from when David Wise straight up resused scripts, not wheter or not they ripped off someone else, that's a different discussion.Regardless of the outcome you're putting Cameron on a pedestal for coming up with a non-recycled concept and saying I'm putting Wise on a pedestal when both did the same thing. Where's that black kettle...

It's not every day that you encounter a person who brags about having undergone absolutely zero personal or intellectual growth since they were a child, but then nothing about this place shocks me anymore. If you're genuinely thrilled about still seeing things through the eyes of a five year old, and find that to be something to be proud of, well... I guess whoever said "Ignorance is Bliss" was well and truly correct.

The statement says quite a lot on it's own, but find it amusing that you appeal to the popularity of things most men your age admit to either have lost interest in a long time ago or haven't bothered to check out since childhood.I'm a film and TV buff of older stuff. I'm also fussy about what I watch. I stopped caring what other men think back when I was 16, I'm not shallow like you guys. ;)

Good, judging by your posting history there's most likely an entire regiment of small pills designed to do that, so I'm glad you don't need me. :trazz:And you just crossed the line. :-?

[Leo656]

And you just proved my entire point with your novella towards neatoman. So?

Your repeated, irrational and overcompensating defense of a kids show that was cancelled over 25 years ago speaks volumes. It goes well beyond being "a fan".

I'm not being mean, simply stating facts. You said that you don't require my approval to feel okay. To that I say, if you were at all "okay", you wouldn't throw a tantrum every time someone points out the numerous flaws of a long-dead children's program.

Your priorities are terrible and your ability to accept basic factual information is nonexistent. It is not cute anymore. It derails actual conversation and is very, very annoying.

If you are going to continue to take any and all criticism of this cartoon as a personal insult, in addition to ignoring any and all facts which don't fit your chosen narrative, then I and others are going to continue to assume that you're malfunctioning.

Plenty of people here love the show and can handle the truth about it in a manner befitting of a grown-up. I suggest that you learn from their example. That's as nice as I can be about it.

[neatoman]

And I'm tired of pointing out when he's writing irrelevant nonsense and ignoring what the actual points are in favour of making strawmen, anyone can check in and see what he's doing wrong by now. I'm just going to make a list of the new problems but keep in mind that there are still other problems with what he wrote, it's just that I've already refuted it and you can just go back and read it.

Animation errors and plotholes are not revisionism, they were always there and always problems. People "liking" the product in spite of these flaws does not mean they aren't flaws.
No David Wise did not lie about everything but the lies still makes it hard to tell when he told the truth, and having people who mourn/respect him does not change that.
Liking the same stuff you did 30+ years ago and being uncritical/defensive of it does not make you a "film and TV buff of older stuff", it means you have rigid taste. If you were a "film and TV buff of older stuff" you'd seek out older material you've never seen before and find new favourites. In that scenario your taste would still change, I seriously doubt most people who check out Orson Welles movies from before they were born still enjoy all the movies they liked as children.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

If you were a "film and TV buff of older stuff" you'd seek out older material you've never seen before and find new favourites. In that scenario your taste would still change, I seriously doubt most people who check out Orson Welles movies from before they were born still enjoy all the movies they liked as children.

So I guess I am qualified as a buff of older stuff, since I seeked out the FW tmnt stuff, having not grown up with it.

It's an incredibly flawed show, but one I enjoy nonetheless immensely.

I also dig Marlon Brando movies, since that handsome man had endless charm and charisma (even when he got fat).

[Leo656]

You're kinda one of the people I had in mind when I spoke of people who can enjoy the old show for what it is without being delusional about it.

A neatoman reiterated, liking the show is Perfectly Fine, but ignoring basic factual information and going on lengthy argument rants about it simply is not. Or the constant accusations of hating/bashing/trashing when nobody's even DOING that here as far as I've seen. Just really tiresome.

I appreciate the show just fine for what it is, but I have a real distaste for people who act like facts don't exist just because they don't suit their personal narrative. Regardless of topic, that kinda sh*t just irks me to no end. Especially if people are going to get combative about it.

Some people need to stick to the FB page. They go out of their way there to delete any "negativity", so if people only ever wanna gush about how perfect and awesome everything is, then fine, there's your echo chamber, folks. Some people actually enjoy a more nuanced level of conversation, though, and it doesn't make them bad people.

[Wesley]

So I guess I am qualified as a buff of older stuff, since I seeked out the FW tmnt stuff, having not grown up with it.

It's an incredibly flawed show, but one I enjoy nonetheless immensely.

I also dig Marlon Brando movies, since that handsome man had endless charm and charisma (even when he got fat).

I guess I’m qualified as a buff of older stuff, as I seeked out the 1990 movie, which I didn’t grow up with.

I still kinda like the 1987 series for what it is, even though I agree it’s an incredibly flawed show.

The Fugitive is my favourite tv show and that came out decades before I was born.

[neatoman]

So I guess I am qualified as a buff of older stuff, since I seeked out the FW tmnt stuff, having not grown up with it.

It's an incredibly flawed show, but one I enjoy nonetheless immensely.

I also dig Marlon Brando movies, since that handsome man had endless charm and charisma (even when he got fat).

I guess I’m qualified as a buff of older stuff, as I seeked out the 1990 movie, which I didn’t grow up with.

I still kinda like the 1987 series for what it is, even though I agree it’s an incredibly flawed show.

The Fugitive is my favourite tv show and that came out decades before I was born.

Yeah, I guess you two would qualify. Seeking out material you haven't seen before to broaden your palette is a good thing, regardless of wheter or not other people agree with whatever opinion you form as a result. And it's also very good to be able to see and accept the flaws with what you like, that means you have the ability to think critically and can develop said ability.

What's not healthy is to have an inflexible opinion, exaggerate the quality, ignore the flaws even when they're obvious and warp counterarguments into something that's easier to defend against. That is not how you should view art and entertainment, or really anything for that matter.

[oldmanwinters]

Man, I can't believe this thread is still active.

[pferreira]

Plenty of people here love the show and can handle the truth about it in a manner befitting of a grown-up. I suggest that you learn from their example. That's as nice as I can be about it.Acting like a hypocrite and a bully does you no favours. Stop bullying people for liking a TV show. First you of course have to grow up. ;)

What's not healthy is to have an inflexible opinion, exaggerate the quality, ignore the flaws even when they're obvious and warp counterarguments into something that's easier to defend against. That is not how you should view art and entertainment, or really anything for that matter.Says the guy who likes the IDW comic which contains FW elements. ;)

A neatoman reiterated, liking the show is Perfectly Fine, but ignoring basic factual information and going on lengthy argument rants about it simply is not. Or the constant accusations of hating/bashing/trashing when nobody's even DOING that here as far as I've seen. Just really tiresome.Tiresome is saying someone can't find good things in a TV show that was made for children because you're 'grown up'. What that really means of course is you just haven't grown up to the point of appreciating things from different demographics.

In saying it's okay to like the FW series you're doing the exact opposite thing by saying I belong in a mental hospital. Sucks to be you. :P

So I guess I am qualified as a buff of older stuff, since I seeked out the FW tmnt stuff, having not grown up with it.
It goes against his subjective narrative so he ignores your opinion as does Leo666 or whatever he's called. :-?

[Leo656]

I'm sorry, but I simply don't have time for simpletons. Please don't engage with me any further. This is the one and only time I'm going to ask nicely.

You're a child, and I don't engage with children.

Best of luck in your future endeavors. Or go away. Either is fine.

This advice is for your own good, trust me. You'll find that I'm nowhere near as patient or kind as neatoman. Walk away.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Acting like a hypocrite and a bully does you no favours. Stop bullying people for liking a TV show. First you of course have to grow up. ;)

Look man, neatoman and Leo656 are not bullying anyone.
Simply repeating something over and over again doesn't make it true, it just makes you tiring to talk with and makes for unproductive discussions in what have been otherwise productive threads.

People are allowed to like the Fred Wolf series and express why they do so, but the same goes for criticism.
Criticism is not the same as bashing.

You know what is bashing though? Accussing other people of not being real fans and dismissing them just because of their like for a certain tmnt incarnation, like what TommyT does in the Rise section for example, by callings fans trolls/fans without offering any opinion about the show in question.

That's not something that neatoman or Leo656 do, at the very least in the context of the Fred Wolf cartoon.

You on the other hand.....

Says the guy who likes the IDW comic which contains FW elements. ;)

And this makes for productive discussion in what way?
This goes back to my point of bashing, you simply dismiss neatoman because he likes the IDW tmnt comics, offering no actual criticism of the comics themselves in their respective sections on the forums.

Its ironic, you accuse neatoman of bashing when he has offered nothing but impersonal criticism of the show (granted, I heavily disagree with him at times and debate him regularly on the entertainment value of Fred Wolf tmnt), but you're doing that exact same thing OVER AND OVER AGAIN by pointing the finger at him for being an IDW fan (as if it makes your points more valid. Hint: it doesn't), when that's not even the topic of discussion.

Tiresome is saying someone can't find good things in a TV show that was made for children because you're 'grown up'. What that really means of course is you just haven't grown up to the point of appreciating things from different demographics.

You know what's actually tiring? Someone who can't handle an opposing opinion about a children's cartoon.

In saying it's okay to like the FW series you're doing the exact opposite thing by saying I belong in a mental hospital. Sucks to be you. :P

If you were accused of being in a mental hospital from day one just for being a fan of the Fred Wolf cartoon from day one, I would be more sympathetic to your side.
Heck, I actually supported you back when you were first accused of being from a mental hospital and your personal information was leaked because it was aimed directly at you and had nothing to do with discussions about the Fred Wolf toon.

But after all these years of simply dismissing others for having opposing opinions and personally attacking them (like your repeated remarks that mock neatoman for his Swedish heritage just for saying that the Fred Wolf series is rubbish), are you really surprised that the same thing is coming back to bite you in the ass?

It goes against his subjective narrative so he ignores your opinion as does Leo666 or whatever he's called. :-?

Neither of the two ignore my opinion and/or personally attack me just for being a devoted fan of the Fred Wolf tmnt cartoon, and that's what makes me respect them, even though the difference in our opinions about the cartoon are like night and day.

[Leo656]

I did kinda get a little bit bullying in that last post. :lol: But that's me being all out of patience and also, we're all kinda dealing with a lotta sh*t right now.

But yeah, your post is very much on-point. It's not that the guy likes the show that gets on peoples' nerves; it's the strawman fallacies, circular logic, outright dismissal of any facts which he finds "inconvenient", and general "No, YOU" responses in absence of anything relevant to add in support of his position.

Look, we all have opinions and everyone deserves to be heard. Sometimes I'll play "Devil's advocate" and argue from a position I don't entirely agree with just to shine light on things that maybe aren't being considered that maybe ought to be. I really don't care what opinions a person holds as long as they can support those positions in a reasonable manner and not hand-wave facts that contradict their own personal narrative. Once a person starts doing that, I won't even pretend to respect them or their position any further, because they're literally blowing hot air.

So. That's my position. Thanks for basically saying the same thing some of us have been trying to say, albeit in a much more even-handed fashion.

I'm not capable of being very nice, most times. :lol: Just not wired that way. But I do try VERY hard not to lose my patience. When people are being willfully obtuse, it becomes incredibly difficult.

[neatoman]

And I should just clarify a few things about my opinion on the IDW series and its relation to the Fred Wolf cartoon.

Yes, the IDW series is not flawless and it does lift some things from the Fred Wolf cartoon. However:

A flaw in the Fred Wolf cartoon, such an animation error or a sound mixing error, does not transfer to the IDW series. That should be obvious to anyone, IDW can't possibly carry over such problems.
As anyone who has both read Mirage and watched Fred Wolf should know, something being "based" on something else doesn't mean they're interchangeable. Mirage Leatherhead is an intelligent and kind creature with anger issues who just wants to rejoin what he consideres his family, Fred Wolf Leatherhead is a cruel bully with little regard for anything other than his own well being. These two are only the same character in the sense of what they are, mutant alligators, and their name. Likewise, I could hardly say Fred Wolf Mutagen Man and IDW MM are all that similar.
It is also possible to improve characters and concepts. The world of comics are full of characters that weren't all that great from the start, but have since become very interesting, simply by coming up with a better way of writing them. Mr. Freeze was little more than the "must live in the cold and carries freeze ray" gimmick, he had very little reason to do much of anything. Add an sick wife he couldn't save and presto, Emmy time! Likewise, Bebop and Rocksteady were little more than idiot henchmen in the Fred Wolf cartoon, not very interesting. But add some hyperviolence, insane destructive abilities, sociopathic personalities and an admission that nobody would really want them around, you actually have something that is amusing.


The keyword here is improvement. Virtually nothing that came from the Fred Wolf cartoon (or let's be honest, the toyline) and ended up in the IDW comic did so unaltered. If characters and concepts did not change from iteration to iteration, then the Fred Wolf cartoon itself would be an extremely different show.

[pferreira]

People are allowed to like the Fred Wolf series and express why they do so, but the same goes for criticism.
Criticism is not the same as bashing.Erm yes it is. That much is obvious. I guess calling the writers hacks isn't bashing then... :roll:

You know what is bashing though? Accussing other people of not being real fans and dismissing them just because of their like for a certain tmnt incarnation, like what TommyT does in the Rise section for example, by callings fans trolls/fans without offering any opinion about the show in question....which is what neatoman and Leo656 do...moving on...

you simply dismiss neatoman because he likes the IDW tmnt comics, offering no actual criticism of the comics themselves in their respective sections on the forums.No I don't because I don't need to. I don't visit the IDW forum or other forums to whine about an iteration of TMNT. If I don't have anything good to say about TMNT I DON'T SAY IT!

Its ironic, you accuse neatoman of bashing when he has offered nothing but impersonal criticism of the showTell that to the FW fans who don't visit this site because of people like him. ;)

You know what's actually tiring? Someone who can't handle an opposing opinion about a children's cartoon.There's an 'opposing opinion' and there's dragging a show you don't like through the mud. To be honest kind of surprised you're defending bullying and nasty behaviour. Yikes.

But after all these years of simply dismissing others for having opposing opinions and personally attacking them (like your repeated remarks that mock neatoman for his Swedish heritage just for saying that the Fred Wolf series is rubbish), are you really surprised that the same thing is coming back to bite you in the ass?Swedish heritage??? I did whaaaaat? Dude now you come across like you're making stuff up. Anyway I very much doubt labelling someone as being from a mental hospital is less worse than joking about a nationality. Think about that.

Neither of the two ignore my opinion and/or personally attack me just for being a devoted fan of the Fred Wolf tmnt cartoon, and that's what makes me respect them, even though the difference in our opinions about the cartoon are like night and day.Well yeah because you seem to say it's okay to bash a TV show!

Your repeated, irrational and overcompensating defense of a kids show that was cancelled over 25 years ago speaks volumes. It goes well beyond being "a fan".
Okay so I'm wrong to defend a TV show I like, one that gets dragged through the mud because it's not seen as adult as you would like. Can you see why I would complain about that? It's being a gatekeeper.

When people are being willfully obtuse, it becomes incredibly difficult.Welcome to my world. I have to deal with people like you on forums all the time. :o

[pferreira]

The keyword here is improvement. Virtually nothing that came from the Fred Wolf cartoon (or let's be honest, the toyline) and ended up in the IDW comic did so unaltered. If characters and concepts did not change from iteration to iteration, then the Fred Wolf cartoon itself would be an extremely different show.So in other words my subjective opinion means the IDW is flawless when it comes to its FW elements. :lol:

[Leo656]

Welcome to my world. I have to deal with people like you on forums all the time. :o

:roll:

"If you meet an asshole in the morning, that's okay, you met an asshole. If everyone you meet all day long is an asshole, then maybe it's you."

Food for thought, pally.

[pferreira]

:roll:

"If you meet an asshole in the morning, that's okay, you met an asshole. If everyone you meet all day long is an asshole, then maybe it's you."

Food for thought, pally.Thankfully that hasn't happened and won't likely to. Move along. ;)

[Jester]

I know it's a bit of a necropost I was watching the Nicolas Cage movie Willy's Wonderland which is meant to cash in on the Five Nights at Freddy's craze.
It also reminded me of the Fred Wolf episode featuring Willy Wombat and his pizza restaurant. Then I begin to wonder two things: 1. Was this one of the first times somebody made a piece of media parodying Chuck-E-Cheese and it's animatronic characters and making them evil? And 2. Who wrote the episode that featured Willy Wombat?
A quick internet search led me to David Wise as the author of the episode Phantom of the Sewers. Which makes me wonder if David Wise would have at one point claimed to have created Five Nights at Freddy's.

[Leo656]

You have to wonder? :lol:

If he were still alive, Wise and Chris Jericho could have an "I Invented _____!" contest that would break the goddamn internet.

[Jester]

:tgrin::tlol:

[oldmanwinters]

I know it's a bit of a necropost I was watching the Nicolas Cage movie Willy's Wonderland which is meant to cash in on the Five Nights at Freddy's craze.
It also reminded me of the Fred Wolf episode featuring Willy Wombat and his pizza restaurant. Then I begin to wonder two things: 1. Was this one of the first times somebody made a piece of media parodying Chuck-E-Cheese and it's animatronic characters and making them evil? And 2. Who wrote the episode that featured Willy Wombat?
A quick internet search led me to David Wise as the author of the episode Phantom of the Sewers. Which makes me wonder if David Wise would have at one point claimed to have created Five Nights at Freddy's.

Every time I see anything related to 5 Nights, I have always immediately thought of "Phantom of the Sewers."

[Galactus]

Remember when Dave Wise suggested that the first Avengers movie took it's plot and final act from the first season of the '87 show? Other than villains coming through a portal they are not similar at all.

I can imagine Age of Ultron lifting the idea of the characters recovering off the grid on a farm from the Mirage books, 1990 movie and the '03 show much more than them being influenced by the Fred Wolf series for the first movie.

[Leo656]

He really said that? :lol: Jesus Christ.

That's some Hulk Hogan "George Foreman only got to endorse that grill because I was taking my kids to school and missed the phone call by five minutes...and also, I was almost in Metallica!"-level nonsense right there. :lol:

[neatoman]

He really said that? :lol: Jesus Christ.

Yes, he did and it's pretty sad. While it is true that both feature a plot about aliens trying to come through a portal in New York, that movie movie was based on a comic book that had been running for almost 25 years by the time FW started airing. Even if there weren't any Avengers stories with a similar plot before 1987 (which is absurd by default, "Stop the aliens from invading" is one of the most cliché superhero plots I can imagine), the Avengers consist of characters who mostly have their own books which just raises the odds of a similar plot happening with these characters outside of the Avengers (again, it's a cliché).

It is far more likely David Wise copied the plot of some other story, quite possibly an Avengers comic (which would be hilarious), for FW season 1 than the 2012 Avengers movie directly copying any of his work. Hell, we know the man liked to take credit for ideas from a comic book, even when it's obvious he didn't come up with them ("April would just be Baxter's lab assistant if it weren't for me, I made her a major character"). So it's not exactly out of character for him...

[Leo656]

Yeah but did he ever try to claim the George Foreman grill? :lol:

"I'm the guy who told Terry that 'Sterling Golden' was a stupid name and that he'd make a lot more money as 'Hulk Hogan', brother!"
- David Wise (probably) :lol:

[Jester]

But how much did Hogan have to pay Marvel for the name Hulk...

Heck, I'm surprised they never tried to hit him for taking Hogan from Crusher Hogan as well.

[Leo656]

Actually someone out there probably has a definitive answer to that question, as there was a settlement in place between the two parties for years after 1985 or so, until Terry purchased all rights to the name outright around 2003 or thereabouts.

But as far as I know it actually wasn't a lot of money, and was more "professional courtesy" than anything. And Marvel didn't actually care at all until ring announcers started billing him as "The INCREDIBLE Hulk Hogan" in '84-ish. Names like "Hulk" and "Hogan" are pretty innocuous in and of themselves, and even in the very early days Hogan never shied away from telling the story of how he took the name "Hulk" after he was on a talk show with Lou Ferrigno. Marvel didn't make a peep at that time. But when the WWF tacked on the "Incredible" part in their official marketing, that's when the Marvel guys were like, "Alright, we probably should call someone."

I believe that Hogan sometimes used the "Incredible" tagline even before 1984 when he was working in other territories like the AWA in Minnesota, but the AWA didn't have TV in the Northeast back then so Marvel's NYC-based people wouldn't have noticed or cared. The WWF, however, was very well-known in the Northeast and they were selling videotapes with "The INCREDIBLE Hulk Hogan" all over them, so I'm not surprised that was the last straw for Marvel.

As I understand it, the terms of the deal were roughly as follows:
- Hulk Hogan could never wear any combination of green and purple gear. He never had anyway, but they wanted to make it a rule.

- The "Incredible" nickname was ixnayed. They immediately switched to "The IMMORTAL Hulk Hogan" and everyone agreed that sounded much better anyways, so this was a net win for Hogan.

- The actual monetary compensation varies depending on who you ask, but I think it was something to the effect of, "$100 per appearance and <1% of all merchandise bearing the words Hulk Hogan, Hulkster, or Hulkamania that was sold." Considering that Hogan was getting paid several thousand dollars per appearance AND pulling in several million a year after merchandise, it was "a lot" of money but not "a LOT" of money, if you know what I mean. Like I'm sure they were glad to have it but it didn't break anyone's bank either.

When Hogan jumped to WCW, the licensing agreement went with him. Turner corporate didn't like having to deal with it, and that's part of why they insisted on calling him "Hollywood Hogan" and dropped the "Hulk" part for several years on all merchandise. Hogan's downside guarantee in WCW was already astronomical so they were looking to cut pennies anywhere they could, and Turner Corporate just figured "Marvel Comics can eat a dick, if we call him 'Hollywood' they can't cry about it."

Finally, after his WWF comeback in 2003 Terry had some petty cash and just bought the name outright, so now Marvel gets nothing. But to be fair, they did okay off of him over the years, and it's not like his name was keeping the lights on over there or anything. Their <1% was a pittance, relatively speaking. But I'm sure they were thrilled to have some "free" money coming in every so often.

These things happen. It's like how Sting the singer predates Sting the wrestler by many, many years. Except the singer never bothered to trademark the name, and Steve Borden the wrestler did. In turn, he agreed to license the name to the singer in perpetuity for one dollar, just as a courtesy. Classy!
-----------

I just now realized, someone on "Ask 411" asked the "How much did Marvel earn off of Hulk Hogan?" question a long time ago, and the answer guy did in fact try his best to come up with a figure. :lol: I can't find it, but here's another article I found after a quick search, which goes into even GREATER detail about every single way Marvel got paid off of Hogan:
https://prowrestlingstories.com/pro-wrestling-stories/marvel-comics-hulk-hogan/?fbclid=IwAR32Gv5fYieL4hRmo4QWcySDN17Jf-PWrmUnAS5edENg7rRAnq1biFFXS38

I really wish I'd just Googled it before typing All That Above off of memory (although my figures were correct! SCORE! :lol:). But I wrote it so y'all are gonna read it. :trazz:

Short answer: A few million bucks. It's... complicated.

[Jester]

Funny how it was the addition of Incredible that cause all the rigmarole and then Marvel eventually did Immortal Hulk. I wonder if they had to pay Hogan at that point.

[Galactus]

Funny how it was the addition of Incredible that cause all the rigmarole and then Marvel eventually did Immortal Hulk. I wonder if they had to pay Hogan at that point.

I think it's more Marvel's thing to launch a new book with cool sounding new adjective than avoiding any conflict with Hulk Hogan. In this case it made sense as it started as more of a horror book that established that the Hulk can't die. Good run btw.

[oldmanwinters]

Actually someone out there probably has a definitive answer to that question, as there was a settlement in place between the two parties for years after 1985 or so, until Terry purchased all rights to the name outright around 2003 or thereabouts. . . .But I wrote it so y'all are gonna read it. :trazz:



Quite informative! I really had no idea.

I get amused everytime I watch anything related to "The Karate Kid" or "Cobra Kai" and see that "Used with permission of DC Comics" tagline on account their completely different "Karate Kid" IP.

[Leo656]

Quite informative! I really had no idea.

I get amused everytime I watch anything related to "The Karate Kid" or "Cobra Kai" and see that "Used with permission of DC Comics" tagline on account their completely different "Karate Kid" IP.

Aw yeah, that's a wacky situation. Like most people, I saw the movies as a kid way before I ever even heard of the comics. Then one day at a comic shop I saw a stack of Karate Kid books and got all excited... then I read them and was like, "...What?" :lol: Suffice to say, I would've preferred the continuing adventures of Daniel-san, and not a second-string Legion of Super-Heroes member. :trazz: