Eastman Interview. The Franchise should lean more on its gritter roots

[Autbot_Benz]

https://i.imgur.com/evD65uP.jpg

[Leo656]

So... what I've been saying all this time, basically. The people who care the most are the ones who always cared, and we're not ready to abandon the ship just yet, we just need to feel like we matter, to be given something we actually like legitimately and not just because we don't have anything better at the moment.

Here's hoping it does turn around. My generation's been either ignored or outright told to f*ck off for almost ten years straight. Time to flip things over. WAY past time.

[frank_one]

Laird being retired, Eastman is going at full throttle. It's funny, almost a passing of the torch or... a taking of the torch. Still, I miss the Laird era, he was more coherent and, after all, he was in charge, not just a hired supervisor.

[AquaParade]

It's been really cool to see Kevin get re-invested in the franchise over the last decade. It's like he had to come around to the fact that TMNT was going to be his legacy, and a great one at that. He really seems to be pushing for the TMNT to return to their roots more than ever lately.

Also, fans of the grittier side of TMNT are some of the most patient fans in the world. We hardly ever get a bone thrown to us. How cool it would be to see things turn around in the same way the Batman franchise got back on track in the 90's.

[frank_one]

How cool it would be to see things turn around in the same way the Batman franchise got back on track in the 90's.TMNT can't go back on track, they are owned by Nickelodeon. They will never be an alternative/underground black and white comics again. A special almost-gritty miniseries here and there is all we can have now.

[Musashi]

That's fine. A new iteration where viewing it isn't like experiencing a ****ing migraine would be a step up. The bar is low right at the moment.

[TigerClaw]

https://i.imgur.com/evD65uP.jpg
The 87 series was what got me started with TMNT. However when I got the black and white comics I wasn't feeling them because they weren't as fun or lighthearted as the cartoon was. So I couldn't get into those mirage comics. Fortunately the Archie Comics then came out and it was exactly what i wanted from TMNT.

To say some of these older fans want something darker is kind of misleading because some of us prefer the more fun and lighthearted stuff. I'm just not into the dark and depressing stuff.

[neatoman]

The 87 series was what got me started with TMNT. However when I got the black and white comics I wasn't feeling them because they weren't as fun or lighthearted as the cartoon was. So I couldn't get into those mirage comics. Fortunately the Archie Comics then came out and it was exactly what i wanted from TMNT.

To say some of these older fans want something darker is kind of misleading because some of us prefer the more fun and lighthearted stuff. I'm just not into the dark and depressing stuff.

Yes but most people who go back and watch the Fred Wolf cartoon will see that it's garbage, a rushed production meant to market toys, featuring no real plot/character developmen and an attempt to disguise it with terrible jokes. It can't really be called "fun" because everything about its is just boring tripe and some of the laziest humor out there. There's basically nothing of substance there and it's hard to see why an adult would find the Mirage studios much more appealing, there are actual attempts to make you care about the story and characters (flawed as they may be).

As for the Archie series I don't get it. It's better than the Fred Wolf cartoon because there's actually stuff going, but it isn't good in any well crafted or artistic sense. Whenever it's not just Steve Murphy getting on a soap box to promote environmentalism, it tells a real schizo storyline that barely makes sense if at all. I could handle PSA crap if the story was actually good but it's not, simply having a story doesn't mean it's worthwhile because it has to work too. And I'm not sure I can call it lighthearted given the fairly disturbing turns it takes, I don't know what you're smoking to think that. And the artwork almost always sucked too.

Mirage isn't perfect but I can at least say I understand most of what's going on and usually care about it when I read the comics. Fred Wolf and Archie are nothing, because they don't care about anything being anything other than a toy commercial and/or a glorified PSA.

[TigerClaw]

Yes but most people who go back and watch the Fred Wolf cartoon will see that it's garbage, a rushed production meant to market toys, featuring no real plot/character developmen and an attempt to disguise it with terrible jokes. It can't really be called "fun" because everything about its is just boring tripe and some of the laziest humor out there. There's basically nothing of substance there and it's hard to see why an adult would find the Mirage studios much more appealing, there are actual attempts to make you care about the story and characters (flawed as they may be).

As for the Archie series I don't get it. It's better than the Fred Wolf cartoon because there's actually stuff going, but it isn't good in any well crafted or artistic sense. Whenever it's not just Steve Murphy getting on a soap box to promote environmentalism, it tells a real schizo storyline that barely makes sense if at all. I could handle PSA crap if the story was actually good but it's not, simply having a story doesn't mean it's worthwhile because it has to work too. And I'm not sure I can call it lighthearted given the fairly disturbing turns it takes, I don't know what you're smoking to think that. And the artwork almost always sucked too.

Mirage isn't perfect but I can at least say I understand most of what's going on and usually care about it when I read the comics. Fred Wolf and Archie are nothing, because they don't care about anything being anything other than a toy commercial and/or a glorified PSA.
I have to disagree, as a grown ass man I'm still very fond of the original series and don't see any problems with it. I'm a believer of if you like something even if its old, Its still good to you years after. My thoughts on it never change. What's good is good for me. My opinions on it never change.

[neatoman]

I have to disagree, as a grown ass man I'm still very fond of the original series and don't see any problems with it. I'm a believer of if you like something even if its old, Its still good to you years after. My thoughts on it never change. What's good is good for me. My opinions on it never change.

If your opinions never change, that never have and you think they never will, it's a sign that you're stagnant which isn't a good thing.

[TigerClaw]

If your opinions never change, that never have and you think they never will, it's a sign that you're stagnant which isn't a good thing.
I have no idea what that even means. Like I said. Even if years go by. The stuff you watched as a kid still looks good to you. Because its what you remember and what you remember was good. Good back then good today. My thoughts on it never change. Im not one to go back and see its flaws because this was a totally different time and Im not comparing it to the new standards that are out there.

[Leo656]

If any person sees things exactly the same way they did when they were 5 or 10 years old, it means that they haven't grown even two inches since they were children. They haven't gained any insight or intelligence and are still seeing the world through a child's eyes.

That doesn't mean "hate things you liked when you were kids", it means gaining the ability to see why these things aren't perfect. And furthermore - and this is a real problem you specifically wrestle with often - developing the ability to understand WHY or HOW anyone could ever think differently about anything that you yourself do.

No sane and rational person looks back on Sesame Street or Teletubbies or Power Rangers and thinks they were flawless works of art, no matter how many hours of their youth they spent watching them. Nobody who's gained any growth or development at all in 25+ years would ever say that about any of those things. A rational person can look at them and say, "Well, they were competent children's programming, and they were entertaining." That's ALL. You can't say they were perfect, or flawless, or great, because objectively, they were not.

That word, "objectivity", is about 9/10s of what separates Adults from Children. The ability to look at things with an unbiased perspective on ANY topic, and say, "While I liked this thing once, and still like it to some degree now, it definitely isn't perfect." That's what "growing up" is.

If a person proudly boasts, "I look at every single thing the exact same way I did when I was a child, several decades ago," then that is the literal description of a "manchild", something no one should ever aspire to be OR brag about. All they're saying is that they have no ability to be rational or objective or unbiased about a subject. "I liked it when I was five" is their entire argument, and they're not interested in even thinking beyond that. They may not even be capable of thinking any deeper than that to begin with. All of these are negative character traits. People are supposed to literally grow and develop as they get older, not just get taller. If a person hasn't done that... then in the harshest terms, they've basically wasted their entire life.

Put simply... they may be a "man", but they're far from "grown."

And they shouldn't brag about it like it's a good thing. "I have the same thoughts and ideas in my head as a 6-year old" isn't something you go around marketing about one's self.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

The 87 series was what got me started with TMNT. However when I got the black and white comics I wasn't feeling them because they weren't as fun or lighthearted as the cartoon was. So I couldn't get into those mirage comics. Fortunately the Archie Comics then came out and it was exactly what i wanted from TMNT.

To say some of these older fans want something darker is kind of misleading because some of us prefer the more fun and lighthearted stuff. I'm just not into the dark and depressing stuff.

That's very narrow minded of you. You should learn to look into other versions of TMNT (the good ones) even if they're not remotely like FW. Don't let nostalgia cloud your judgement.

[Andrew NDB]

What does he mean at the end there, "where we'll take it"? Like more "Last Ronin" stories? The general direction of TMNT at IDW? Something else?

[Powder]

What does he mean at the end there, "where we'll take it"? Like more "Last Ronin" stories? The general direction of TMNT at IDW? Something else?

It's not like it means anything. Eastman is as well intended as they come, but he's said a lot over the years that amounted to nothing, or was contradictory. Maybe it's Viacom that prevents any of his wants from existing, but nonetheless, it never pays to get hype from his interviews. :(

[Zachatello00]

I love these conversations!

I'm the person Kevin is talking about. 100%. I was hooked into the original show in 2nd grade (in the late 80s), loved it through childhood, outgrew it, left it behind, watched the original movie while unpacking my bags in my first college dorm room, and suddenly got sucked back in (as Kevin put it) for life. The mirage TMNT books kept me entertained because at the time, the DVDs of the original toon weren't available (just a few VHS episodes) but in looking at the old cartoon as an adult, I saw it for the toy commercial it was.

Having said that, oddly enough, toy collecting is by far my favorite thing about being a turtles fan. And I think the reason why (my office is full of them) is because when people see them, it sparks conversations. "Wow, I remember these from when I was a kid." "Wow, you've got some neat stuff in here." "Tell me what these are? I think the neighbor kid had some."

As for what I want to see out of turtle entertainment? I think it's great that there is a wide variety of options out there. Someone mentioned Batman as an example. That's a great example. You've got your kid/family friendly versions of Batman - Batman 66, Brave and the Bold, etc. You've got your middle of the road Batman - the 90s series, Arkham, etc. Then you've got your more dark/hardcore stuff - the Dark Knight trilogy, the comics, etc.

Not sure how much I see Nick allowing the latter for TMNT, but I think about like, the Image Comics, for example. Is it fair to say those were the grittiest turtles stories? Not necessarily for me (the original movie is the perfect tone for me), but I'm happy that fans who want that darker turtle's universe have those comics to enjoy. And for today's kids, "Rise" is right up their alley.

In short, I like that there are options for people based on their preference/style/what have you.

[FooKid]

The 87 series was what got me started with TMNT. However when I got the black and white comics I wasn't feeling them because they weren't as fun or lighthearted as the cartoon was. So I couldn't get into those mirage comics. Fortunately the Archie Comics then came out and it was exactly what i wanted from TMNT.

To say some of these older fans want something darker is kind of misleading because some of us prefer the more fun and lighthearted stuff. I'm just not into the dark and depressing stuff.

I like some of the gritty interpretations, but I fall into the same camp. I really enjoy the more light hearted presentation. I still go back to the toon and enjoy it immensely with all it's flaws. I think that is part of the charm it has for me.

There is room for both and why the IP will continue to be so strong moving forward. I am not sure why the conversations in this forum have to turn into cases where users are being called man children because they like a certain interpretation.

I think it is really great that people who want that darker style may get something developed sooner than later. IDW to Ronin, you can start to see it trending a bit. The question for the gritty crowd, would you prefer it to be more of a TV style series or movie? I think the gritty style almost lends itself more to a lower budget TV style.

[Coola Yagami]

IDK, I grew up loving the old cartoon, and it's so ingrained in my mind it's hard to go watch em after a while cause I have it too memorized. I do still like Raph's 4th wall-breaking, Mikey's surfer dude voice, Shredder insulting his henchmen and April's... everything.

I know there are still a few eps left for me to watch, like the European vacation and some of Red Sky. I'll get to them eventually.

But man, even as a kid, after playing the arcade game and watching the live action movie, even back then, some of the 'the turtles are bad-ass' goggles wore off and I realized there was barely any actual action in the later episodes.

The 2 examples that came to mind was an ep where Shredder locked them in a room with like 500 Foot Soldier or whatever. The Turtles were pretty much making 'well, I guess this is how we're gonna die' jokes without even ****in' trying to fight them. Like dude, there's 4 of you, you got weapons, you fought these robots before. At least ****ing TRY. You're supposed to be ****ing action heroes dammit (at least in this incarnation before Leo or Andrew jump in to correct me :lol: )

The other example was the one time I decided to revisit the Mona Lisa episode, I was instantly turned off by the fact that Raph and Mona spent most of the episode running from the bad guys rather than actually fight them, at least Raph who is supposed to be the ****in Ninja Turtle.

Of course once we got Batman the Animated Series and X-Men, you really do see how the Turtles were seriously lacking in the fighting department in comparison.

IDK, I can sit back and watch the old episodes and they take me back to a time where the only thing that mattered back then was when a new episode or toy was going to come out. But I mean, I can acknowledge they weren't exctly masterpiece theater y'know?

[Leo656]

IDK, I can sit back and watch the old episodes and they take me back to a time where the only thing that mattered back then was when a new episode or toy was going to come out. But I mean, I can acknowledge they weren't exctly masterpiece theater y'know?

I mean, that's all anyone's really saying, is show a little objective, unbiased reasoning. Nobody says "You can't like _____, it's automatically junk because you grew up" (even though SOME things aimed at kids are junk and they're too young to know or care, but I'd argue that's not everything that comes out).

The original "Masters of the Universe" cartoon is one of my all-time favorites. Do I think it's perfect? No, there's a lot about it that was pretty laughable in hindsight. Do I think some/most of the criticisms people sling towards it nowadays are a bit overblown? Yes, a lot of it is based in some truth but I also think people can take it too far and refuse to grade it on a curve when it pretty much has to be. Do I like it AS much as I did when I was 5? Not entirely. I can't help but snicker at some of the shortcomings. But is it everything I "need" it to be, and do I still enjoy watching it whenever I can? Yes, absolutely.

A lot of this can be applied to the original TMNT cartoon as well. And that's really all anyone is saying. You can be objective and unbiased even when revisiting something you love from childhood. You can still enjoy things without being a goddamn mark about it and pretending that they're flawless and perfect when NO, they're clearly not. That's what being an adult is. Obstinately refusing to even acknowledge that a thing has imperfections is childlike and juvenile.

"Love" is not pretending your wife doesn't have a third nipple, it's acknowledging that fact and choosing to be with her anyway. Pretending that it isn't there just means you're lying to yourself.

[FooKid]

I mean, that's all anyone's really saying, is show a little objective, unbiased reasoning. Nobody says "You can't like _____, it's automatically junk because you grew up" (even though SOME things aimed at kids are junk and they're too young to know or care, but I'd argue that's not everything that comes out).

The original "Masters of the Universe" cartoon is one of my all-time favorites. Do I think it's perfect? No, there's a lot about it that was pretty laughable in hindsight. Do I think some/most of the criticisms people sling towards it nowadays are a bit overblown? Yes, a lot of it is based in some truth but I also think people can take it too far and refuse to grade it on a curve when it pretty much has to be. Do I like it AS much as I did when I was 5? Not entirely. I can't help but snicker at some of the shortcomings. But is it everything I "need" it to be, and do I still enjoy watching it whenever I can? Yes, absolutely.

A lot of this can be applied to the original TMNT cartoon as well. And that's really all anyone is saying. You can be objective and unbiased even when revisiting something you love from childhood. You can still enjoy things without being a goddamn mark about it and pretending that they're flawless and perfect when NO, they're clearly not. That's what being an adult is. Obstinately refusing to even acknowledge that a thing has imperfections is childlike and juvenile.

"Love" is not pretending your wife doesn't have a third nipple, it's acknowledging that fact and choosing to be with her anyway. Pretending that it isn't there just means you're lying to yourself.


Agree with your sentiment of open mindedness in the community. For context, the posts you were responding to seemed like an overreaction, because someone did say you shouldn't like it because they view it as junk.

Quote:
"it's garbage, a rushed production meant to market toys, featuring no real plot/character developmen and an attempt to disguise it with terrible jokes. It can't really be called "fun" because everything about its is just boring tripe and some of the laziest humor out there. There's basically nothing of substance"

[neatoman]

I didn't say you shouldn't like it, I said most people would think sucks if they went back and watched it.

[Vegita-San]

If your opinions never change, that never have and you think they never will, it's a sign that you're stagnant which isn't a good thing.

********.

Just proves that it's good. and stands the test of time.

I can enjoy the original 1982 Pac-Man series just as much now as I did as when it first aired. However, even as old as I am, I enjoy the new series just as much. mostly because both where taken seriously by their creators and had some thought put into it to make it fun and enjoyable.

Always find it odd how people who don't like the original series have to trash it in order to make something newer seem better.

[TigerClaw]

********.

Just proves that it's good. and stands the test of time.

I can enjoy the original 1982 Pac-Man series just as much now as I did as when it first aired. However, even as old as I am, I enjoy the new series just as much. mostly because both where taken seriously by their creators and had some thought put into it to make it fun and enjoyable.

Always find it odd how people who don't like the original series have to trash it in order to make something newer seem better.
Indeed. I never understood that either. Its almost like they don't even care any more. If you were a fan of something from a long time ago. You will still be a fan of it regardless if its dated or not. People can not look at the old stuff and compare it to the new and then argue that the new stuff is better because of this or that. The old stuff was made during a specific era and I think its unfair to compare it to the newer stuff because they are entirely different things.

[neatoman]

********.

Just proves that it's good. and stands the test of time.

I can enjoy the original 1982 Pac-Man series just as much now as I did as when it first aired. However, even as old as I am, I enjoy the new series just as much. mostly because both where taken seriously by their creators and had some thought put into it to make it fun and enjoyable.

Always find it odd how people who don't like the original series have to trash it in order to make something newer seem better.

Indeed. I never understood that either. Its almost like they don't even care any more. If you were a fan of something from a long time ago. You will still be a fan of it regardless if its dated or not. People can not look at the old stuff and compare it to the new and then argue that the new stuff is better because of this or that. The old stuff was made during a specific era and I think its unfair to compare it to the newer stuff because they are entirely different things.

Except there are so many things about the show that are straight up poorly made outside of what personal taste says. You can easily find layer errors, missing frames of animation, choppy animation, coloring mistakes, duplicate characters, missing backgrounds, characters talking in the wrong voices, inappropriate sound effects, speaking with no lip movement, etc, etc. There's a fairly exhaustive explaination somewhere around here where I explain why/how the plot of season 1 is total gibberish, but I don't think this is the place to do that again and why I'm just pointing out the errors that are simply visible/audible to your naked senses with minimal thinking going into it, but keep in mind that writing/editiing/directing is really important too.

And no, pointing that stuff out isn't for the purpose of propping other stuff or make unfair comparisons to newer material. All that stuff are flaws that would make it a bad show on it's own and you'd very likely criticise any other show for having them, nor were they somehow not problems simply because it was harder to keep that stuff in order back then. If there was a ladder factory 500 years ago that made ladder that would break after 5 minutes of use, would you go "Well, they had worse ladder making tools back then, so they were good ladders by the standards of the time and we shouldn't criticise them for it"? No, it just means they made bad ladders! And **** me, I've personally pointed out why the 2012 show doesn't really work either despite how many fans that show has, so obviously I didn't criticise the Fred Wolf cartoon to make that look better. Maybe there is something more to wheter or not something works than personal opinion?

And I'm sorry, your entitled to your personal opinion but if you don't spot the flaws (the very blatant flaws), that's not a sign it's good. It just means you're either not thinking about the show critically or ignoring the flaws, either way it prevents you from refining your pallette. I like many things just fine but that doesn't mean I shouldn't think about them or pretend I'm not seeing when there's something bad about them.

[Leo656]

I think the crux of their point of view is, "I personally don't care about those things, therefore, no one should care about those things." With a subtle undertone of, "If you do notice or care about those things you're a jerk."

I don't agree with it. But there's absolutely no way to try and have a dialogue with someone if that's their mindset, regardless of topic.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Indeed. I never understood that either. Its almost like they don't even care any more. If you were a fan of something from a long time ago. You will still be a fan of it regardless if its dated or not. People can not look at the old stuff and compare it to the new and then argue that the new stuff is better because of this or that. The old stuff was made during a specific era and I think its unfair to compare it to the newer stuff because they are entirely different things.

That is not true. Something you enjoyed as a kid, may not necessarily be something you enjoy when you grow up. Aging can depend on it's quality. It can be hard for some people to go back to something they loved decades ago because it may not have stood the test of time, in their eyes. A new product based on an old property can indeed surpass what came before it. Based on what I've read/heard, the new Ducktales cartoon is said to be more enjoyable than the original on an objective level (I've only watched one or two episodes so I can't speak for myself). Would you say the old cartoon is better because of nostalgia? If so, that's a pretty weak argument. Furthermore, if it's part of the same property, I don't see why comparing it is unfair. You kinda did that with Mirage for not being anything like what you were exposed to first.

[Leo656]

When I was like three, one of my favorite things to do was sneak into the fridge and eat sticks of butter and/or big spoonfuls of mayonnaise.

Probably a good thing I expanded my horizons a little bit or I'd probably be dead by now.

I confess to once every couple of years I'll rarely go to town on about half a can of chocolate cake frosting, though. That's one that I kept from when I was a kid. But at least I don't do it like once a week like I used to. :lol:

But yeah, point is you're supposed to kind of shift gears a little bit as you move through life. Also, don't eat sticks of butter. Cake frosting's okay.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Hey if it helps I scoop a spoon full of peanut butter and mix it with my bowl of Reese's Puffs Cereal. Because I'm an adult!:lol:

[Leo656]

Because I'm an adult!:lol:

.........Not for much longer, if you keep that up, pal. :lol:

[Wildcat]

Peanut butter is healthy though. I spread it on a little thick when I have a pb and jelly sandwich.

I’ll always enjoy the FW cartoon. I don’t think it’s as ridiculous as some make it out to be (expect for some animation errors) but my favorite series is 4kids. It’s just a better show.

As for this I think Nick would allow some kind of “adult” alternative to their own cartoons. Not rated R of course but I don’t think it needs to go that far to be good. Just something with a more grim tone.

[Shark_Blade]

Imagine a Sin-City type of TMNT movie. Would be very cool to see.

[triplexxx]

Laird wanted the same thing, even though he said the previous incarnations were ok. Yeah they can go many directions with this, with adult and R-rated level stuff I'm sure...just as long as the turtles' designs are acceptable.

[Vegita-San]

I think the crux of their point of view is, "I personally don't care about those things, therefore, no one should care about those things." With a subtle undertone of, "If you do notice or care about those things you're a jerk."

I don't agree with it. But there's absolutely no way to try and have a dialogue with someone if that's their mindset, regardless of topic.


Originally Posted by neatoman View Post
If your opinions never change, that never have and you think they never will, it's a sign that you're stagnant which isn't a good thing.

That is far too blatant a statement to make. I can notice the problems with the original series and STILL enjoy it for what it is. I can also enjoy the 4kids series and 2k12 series while still being objective about it.

saying that I still enjoy it the same way I did when I was 2 and can never change isn't a fair statement. you can still enjoy something while seeing the flaws in it and NOT tear it down at the same time.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by neatoman View Post
If your opinions never change, that never have and you think they never will, it's a sign that you're stagnant which isn't a good thing.

That is far too blatant a statement to make. I can notice the problems with the original series and STILL enjoy it for what it is. I can also enjoy the 4kids series and 2k12 series while still being objective about it.

saying that I still enjoy it the same way I did when I was 2 and can never change isn't a fair statement. you can still enjoy something while seeing the flaws in it and NOT tear it down at the same time.

Something doesn't need to be "good" for you to enjoy it. There are a number of factors that can contribute to your enjoyment, such as nostalgia, ironic enjoyment or unintentional humor. Your enjoyment alone does not mean it is well crafted or holds up, it just means there is something outside of the competency of the craft or the actual artistic merit that helps form your opinion. I like the Venom movie but I know it sucks balls because it's poorly written and edited, my enjoyment pretty much only comes from Tom Hardy's bizarre performance.

There's a big difference between something being well made and something being liked, it's actually a little sad that so many don't understand it.

[Vegita-San]

If you don't like it, you won't think it's good. and it's pretty clear you are trying to go to lengths to convince people it isn't good.


that's you're opinion.

Other people, who can be objective, and know it has flaws, can still think it's good. and quite frankly, because it's stood the test of time and multiple generations...others think so as well.

but, this is the never ending debate here between mirage hard cores and those of us who came after. I guess we just arn't good enough to be turtle fans ;o).

[Leo656]

I think the fact that this 20+ year old "debate" is the only thing anyone thinks is worth talking about just proves how sh*tty it is to be a TMNT fan nowadays.

[neatoman]

If you don't like it, you won't think it's good. and it's pretty clear you are trying to go to lengths to convince people it isn't good.


that's you're opinion.

Other people, who can be objective, and know it has flaws, can still think it's good. and quite frankly, because it's stood the test of time and multiple generations...others think so as well.

but, this is the never ending debate here between mirage hard cores and those of us who came after. I guess we just arn't good enough to be turtle fans ;o).

I don't understand how you can claim to be objective and say the show stood the test of time when the show was never well written, never well animated and never well edited. If the show never held basic standards in the first place, then by definition it couldn't have stood the test of time.

[Leo656]

Well, I mean now we're hitting gray areas. All of those things can be and are objectively true but it doesn't mean the show(s) themselves weren't entertaining Then or can't still be to some Now.

For starters, yes, ALL of those things are true, it was a very flawed show. BUT, it wasn't just par for the course among shows of its day, it was inarguably a lot better than MOST of the cartoons in the pre-Batman: TAS era. Like let's be completely honest, what other 1980s cartoons were "better" than TMNT before the Batman cartoon came along and changed the game entirely? I honestly can't think of many, and you know I'm not afraid to call the TMNT cartoon out for what it is. And I don't think it's at all fair to just wave a dismissive hand and say, like, "Cartoons just plain sucked before Batman came along and 'fixed' everything." That's MOSTLY true, but it's also not entirely fair.

I mean, playing devil's advocate, I absolutely prefer "He-Man and the Masters of the Universe" over FW TMNT as far as what I'd rather watch on a given day, but is it better-done? Debatable. There aren't anywhere near as many errors as in TMNT, because Filmation ran a pretty tight ship on that side of things, but it was definitely made on the cheap and some people can't handle all the stock footage and re-used animation cycles. It doesn't bother ME, but to many it's a flaw. And out of 130 episodes produced in a two-year cycle, some of them were definitely clunkers. As bad as "Mr. Ogg" on the TMNT side of things? Probably not. :lol: But there's a case to be made that while some episodes absolutely sparkle, others were not "well-written". That show, like many 1980s cartoons, is an example of the Whole being far greater then The Sum of Its Parts.

MOTU, Voltron, Transformers, G.I. Joe... all of those shows are still "iconic" but also very, very flawed. They're full of things that are objectively "bad" or done poorly, but is it fair to call them "bad shows"? I don't think so, I really think a person needs to grade on a curve because even the very best of that crop falls way, way short of what cartoon standards would become even 5 years later in a post-Batman world. Obviously they're imperfect, because standards were SO much looser back then, but they've all obviously "stood the test of time" because millions of people still enjoy them, even those who can clearly see the strings and Scotch tape holding them together.

To be perfectly honest, even though there are several cartoons from that era which I personally like better, it's very hard for me to think of one that was truly "better" or better-made than TMNT until Batman came along. The best I can come up with is the early seasons of "The Real Ghostbusters". That was probably the best cartoon show ever made until Batman insofar as quality of the scripts/writing, lack of editing and continuity errors, and the other things you cite as being able to judge and grade by. But even then, you can only really say that about the early couple of seasons, as once Slimer became the central focus the entire thing fell in the trash. So nothing is perfect. But yeah, as far as "Were any 1980s cartoons truly any better than TMNT?", RGB is all I can think of. And even with that show, the animation was a little stiff.

Point being, I think it's just not fair to say "If something was objectively never good, it can't possibly have stood the test of time" because that kind of statement ignores the fact that standards were a whole lot lower back then. The only fair thing to do is compare those things to their contemporaries and not what came after. Part of why Batman: TAS was the complete revelation that it was, was because people simply didn't try that hard ever before. After that, there was a rising tide in which everyone who made cartoons was expected to step their game up. But even with that, it took until the end of the 90s for that to become a universal standard. There were still a ton of 1990s cartoons that were written and executed more like late-80s cartoons.

I'unno, I think you get what I'm saying. Grading on a curve is necessary when discussing things of a bygone era, and it's not fair to say that they "Couldn't have stood the test of time" simply because they were laid down on a cracked foundation. Especially since tons of people do still enjoy those things without irony.

MY problem becomes, when people either dismiss or ignore those flaws entirely as in pretending they never existed, or act like anyone who doesn't still love those things Now as much as they did Then is some kind of Big Meanie out to spoil everyone's fun. "I loved it Then so I love it Now and I don't need any reason other than 'I loved it Then', that's good enough for me" IS rather childish in and of itself, but it depends on how far you're willing to take it. If a person just wants to enjoy that thing, then that's fine. If they start saying, "I want EVERYTHING to be like this because it's what I personally like," then they're no different from the Big Meanies.

In the case of TMNT, staying locked into the FW tone and style for everything would only hasten the brand's demise. Not only has it been done and RE-done, but too many people have been waiting impatiently for the brand to "grow up" already, and outside of the 1990 movie and the first couple seasons of 4Kids, it simply was never "allowed" to, and we can see how that hurts the brand in the way that every new "kid-centric" version that comes out gets a worse reception, and is ignored more quickly, than the last. We've seen how "the new kids" that are supposedly the audience simply don't stick around anymore, and how each new version pushes away a few more adults.

"Well, *I* like it silly and goofy, so I want ALL of it silly and goofy. SO HUH." That's MY problem with some people. They don't care one bit that they're sending the brand they claim to love directly into the sh*tter by refusing to see why that approach is flawed and that their opinion isn't the only one that matters. The cartoons, the IDW comics... "*I* like this approach, so if you don't like it, go screw." Opinions are one thing, but when the approach you love so much is actively and openly pushing people AWAY from the brand... well, at the very least, it only makes sense to consider changing course before it's too late.

[TigerClaw]

I want the movies and TV shows to be based around the IDW comics. It took some of the FW elements and give them maturity. Kind of like what they did with the Archie comics. IDW feels like FW but with modern sensibility.

[Vegita-San]

"Well, *I* like it silly and goofy, so I want ALL of it silly and goofy. SO HUH." That's MY problem with some people. They don't care one bit that they're sending the brand they claim to love directly into the sh*tter by refusing to see why that approach is flawed and that their opinion isn't the only one that matters. The cartoons, the IDW comics... "*I* like this approach, so if you don't like it, go screw." Opinions are one thing, but when the approach you love so much is actively and openly pushing people AWAY from the brand... well, at the very least, it only makes sense to consider changing course before it's too late.

Problem is, I see that more from the Mirage fans than anyone else. I came in during the fw era. I learned to like Next Mutation. I learned to love the movies. I learned to love 4kids. I learned to tolerate 2k12 because of IT'S MANY flaws. I learned to appreciate Mirage and Archie for what they did. And I absolutely love Batman/TMNT.

Mirage fans seem to mostly be stuck in Mirage only mode and can't appreciate much else.

[Leo656]

Problem is, I see that more from the Mirage fans than anyone else. I came in during the fw era. I learned to like Next Mutation. I learned to love the movies. I learned to love 4kids. I learned to tolerate 2k12 because of IT'S MANY flaws. I learned to appreciate Mirage and Archie for what they did. And I absolutely love Batman/TMNT.

Mirage fans seem to mostly be stuck in Mirage only mode and can't appreciate much else.

That's true, many of them are like that, but I'd argue theirs is at root still a noble cause.

If TMNT wasn't created to be "a little kids' thing" - and it absolutely was not - seeing it be forevermore forced down that path, and furthermore, to see so many people wholeheartedly insist that "That's the RIGHT way to do it! That's the way it SHOULD be done!" must be absolutely maddening for some people.

They're not explicitly trying to ruin anyone's fun, they're simply pleading for a return to what the roots of the franchise are - indeed, what it WAS created to be before Playmates got their dirty little hooks into it.

People on either side can take their point of view too far, sure. But the fact is, TMNT really wasn't created to be a silly little romp for the kiddies, and that ANY version of it that presents itself in such a manner is fundamentally a bastardization of the original concept. In a word, it is heresy. It doesn't matter if a lot of people like it that way, they're entitled to their opinion but the fact remains it's a perversion of the creators' original intent. And that's not cool. People can enjoy said perversion, but that doesn't make it any less so.

What those purists want more than anything, is simply to have SOME part of the franchise retain some of its original integrity. And I can't find any fault with that even if at times their approach is intolerant and heavy-handed. Their hearts are still, ultimately, in the right place. The FW apologists? "I like it this way because it reminds me of the safe, warm and fuzzy feelings I got when I watched it age 6" seems a lot less noble, to me. It really is just sentimentality run amok.

I mean, Mirage to me is as dry as rice crackers. On any given day, I'd probably rather watch an episode of FW than read through a handful of Mirage books. But at the same time, I know which stylistic approach is altogether better for the long-term health of the franchise, as well as which approach entices a better class of "fan". We really don't need any more children OR manchildren attaching themselves to this franchise, "elitist" as it may be to say so out loud.

The children, "thankfully", don't really like TMNT anyway and quit on it after a few minutes because it's not their thing. The true median age of the "real" TMNT fan is 30-something. That said, to start leaning more towards that demographic's sensibilities can only be the right thing to do. I don't see why a certain group of people push back against that idea so hard... other than, that's not the thing that gave them warm fuzzies when they were little.

And that's fine, but some people actually did grow up, and are beyond sick to death of being ignored or told their vote doesn't count.

We all had our childhood. And it's nice to revisit it fondly. I do that every day with something or other. BUT, it also was supposed to have ended a long time ago and still living there in that same exact headspace is ultimately detrimental. Time to move forward, time to move on.

Time to let some of those things we loved as kids grow up WITH us, when applicable.

[frank_one]

Mirage fans seem to mostly be stuck in Mirage only mode and can't appreciate much else.So what? Are they supposed to feel guilty about that? Mirage stuff is very different from everything else it generated. It is not so weird to appreciate Mirage and to not care about the rest.

[AquaParade]

Mirage is my favorite but I'm open to all interpretations that aren't primarily focused on selling toys.

[Leo656]

I mean, I don't have a huge PROBLEM with selling toys. Most of what I own is toys, I love toys. :lol: And if ever a concept did lend itself wholesale to the selling of plastic trinkets, TMNT most certainly at a glance seems a perfect fit.

I just feel like there can and should be a raison d'etre beyond Just That. You can have that. But man, they BEEN had that, dawg.

When the One Group ALWAYS gets their way, it can be a little frustrating for those who want something else.

[AquaParade]

Toys are awesome. I should clarify that I am just speaking in terms of storytelling mediums. And further, I am fine with cartoons that are made to primarily sell toys, as they help keep the franchise afloat. I'm just generally not interested in watching them anymore.

[Vegita-San]

That's true, many of them are like that, but I'd argue theirs is at root still a noble cause.

Time to let some of those things we loved as kids grow up WITH us, when applicable.

I can understand that. and that's one reason why I loved Batman/TMNT, because it was a bit of a darker take and shredder was allowed to kill and be serious while still being fun. Hell, in the first episode of 4kids, he kills a purple dragon off/on screen and laughs. that was a great shock right there.

I can understand the reason WHY mirage fans push back against all else. but to say something isn't good, or doesn't stand the test of time just because you think it shouldn't exist..you can't see how that feels stagnant?

But, all in all I agree. I think it's time for a darker take on TMNT again. but not TOO dark that it looses it's fun and heart. The FW elements where pushed beyond their limits with 2k12 and it sort of didn't fit in that show.
the two don't always work well together.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

I don't see why being too dark is a problem for any other version to do. Some versions will be darker than others. It works for Batman.

[Leo656]

My biggest problem is, there only seems to be room at the table for ONE version of TMNT at any given time. It's not like with Batman where you can have a PG-rated (or G-rated) cartoon show on TV, a PG-13 movie and an R-rated comic book all happening at the same time. Part of Batman's enduring appeal absolutely lies in the fact that at any given time, you can have your pick of ALL of that. If you only had ONE of those things available at a time, the appeal shrinks exponentially.

Too often, "kiddie-style" TMNT is ALL there is, so it makes it even more frustrating when people insist over and over again that that's all they need. Not everybody agrees with that, dammit!

I definitely wouldn't want everything to be "Bodycount". But I'd have a lot more patience with the kiddie stuff if it weren't the only dish being re-heated and served, over and over and OVER again.

I've said this before, but part of why TMNT hasn't reached the popularity of something like Batman, and likely won't become as enduring, is because there's this stubborn refusal to let it TRULY become an "all-ages" property. There's nothing for the older fans, most of the time. That's self-defeating.

I've banged this drum before, but if WB had bought the property, things would be completely different right now. One need only look at their He-Man comics by DC to see how far they'd be willing to go. Under them, we could very well have had a G-rated cartoon show, an R-rated or PG-13 comic book (or even several different books aimed at various age groups accordingly) and a PG-13 movie (or even an R-rated one) all out at the same time. They do that ALL the time with their various brands. They made an R-rated movie with Superman in it! Now, some of those products aren't to everyone's personal taste, but don't misread my point. My point is simply that if WB owned TMNT, there definitely, definitely would not be some "It has to be Kids' Stuff ALL The Time" mandate in place, and that would ultimately serve everyone much better than what we have right now.

Instead, it got bought by Nick, who ONLY makes kiddie stuff. Right there, 80% of your audience is being ignored because "They're not who we market to."

That's terrible. I knew from the start it would come to this. I'm not clairvoyant, but it doesn't take a mind reader to see that when your brand-holder only cares about selling toys to 5-year olds, you're simply never going to get anything that aims outside that demographic. That's limiting, that's self-defeating, that's shortsighted... it's just plain not how things should ever be done.

There's enough stuff you can do with TMNT to truly and try and aim it at EVERYONE. Problem is... "They" don't see it that way, and outright refuse to even try.

[Vegita-San]

Again, I agree.

Nick is FAR too limiting in what they are willing to do. but at the same time, that is why I am shocked that 2K12 was allowed to go as far as they did, and Batman/TMNT happened at all.

But, on the other hand, Rise shows exactly why Nick isn't the right fit for TMNT.

At least 98% of us can agree on that.

I don't know if WB would have done better. But, I feel like they have more experience in a property like TMNT than nick does, and could have had a better team on it from the start. plus, the possible WB/TMNT crossovers with Superman and Batman heh.

Although, at the same time, with all the DC properties, it might be why they didn't feel the need to add tmnt to the mix.

[AquaParade]

Leo, you're so right.

All we can do is speak with our dollars, unless we are about to start a Snyder-Cut type movement. When speaking with our dollars, I don't think it's enough to just cut off the things we aren't interested in, but we have to support the bones they do occasionally throw us.

Which is why I really think The Last Ronin is a good chance for older fans to send up an "SOS" to Viacom. Sure, the comic book medium is small potatoes, but the book is making a splash that's hard to ignore at this point. It has some momentum and there aren't too many opportunities to show support for this stuff. It would be ideal for Viacom to be forced to acknowledge the success of The Last Ronin at the same time "Rise..." is a smoldering heap in the background. That has to send a message.

TMNT should be treated with the same nuance and care that the DC franchises benefit from. I suppose WB has the confidence to let these characters go dark places because they have been around for so long. TMNT is up there now. The humongous fan base has aged and maintained interest. The franchise has proven it can take a beating and get back up. It really should be stretching it's wings.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

I'm definitely going to buy The Last Ronin, whenever it comes out.

[Leo656]

I don't know if WB would have done better. But, I feel like they have more experience in a property like TMNT than nick does, and could have had a better team on it from the start. plus, the possible WB/TMNT crossovers with Superman and Batman heh.

Although, at the same time, with all the DC properties, it might be why they didn't feel the need to add tmnt to the mix.

I feel like they would by default have HAD to have done better, simply because WB and DC understand that their brands truly are "all-ages" and work hard to hit EVERY available demographic. They know preschoolers love Batman. They know teenagers love Batman. They know there are still people who've been reading Batman for over 50 years. And on any given day, ALL of those people get their pick of any number of products aimed at Them. And they can also partake of or ignore the others at their leisure. Everybody Wins, ALL the time.

Sometimes they hit, sometimes they miss, sometimes they break even. But NOBODY can say that WB/DC doesn't know or understand how to provide variety across all age groups and demographics. They EXCEL at that. They even know that some things they publish simply don't belong in the same world as Superman and Batman, and keep them in their own "sandbox" most of the time.

That's what I would hope/expect of a DC-owned TMNT comic. I honestly think they'd do it like He-Man, and keep it set in its own universe and only "crossing over" rarely, if ever. There was the "Injustice" cross-over, which was... odd... but aside from that it's not like He-Man and Superman are a "tag team" and pop up in each others' books often or anything. The only thing they really share is a publisher. Sure, they'd inevitably cross-over for some big "event", but like He-Man, I have to believe that it would only be done sparingly at most. They know that's not what people wanna see, by and large.

But anything would be better than "Kiddie Sh*t or Nothing (except for the comic books we only make a pittance on, anyway)", which is the unspoken rule Right Now.

We'll see if "Ronin" is just a bone or the start of something bigger. One can hope it's the latter.

[AquaParade]

Whether The Last Ronin becomes something more will, again, depend on how much money it makes. If all we do is complain about the stuff we don't like, they won't care.

[neatoman]

Well, I mean now we're hitting gray areas. All of those things can be and are objectively true but it doesn't mean the show(s) themselves weren't entertaining Then or can't still be to some Now.

For starters, yes, ALL of those things are true, it was a very flawed show. BUT, it wasn't just par for the course among shows of its day, it was inarguably a lot better than MOST of the cartoons in the pre-Batman: TAS era. Like let's be completely honest, what other 1980s cartoons were "better" than TMNT before the Batman cartoon came along and changed the game entirely? I honestly can't think of many, and you know I'm not afraid to call the TMNT cartoon out for what it is. And I don't think it's at all fair to just wave a dismissive hand and say, like, "Cartoons just plain sucked before Batman came along and 'fixed' everything." That's MOSTLY true, but it's also not entirely fair.

I mean, playing devil's advocate, I absolutely prefer "He-Man and the Masters of the Universe" over FW TMNT as far as what I'd rather watch on a given day, but is it better-done? Debatable. There aren't anywhere near as many errors as in TMNT, because Filmation ran a pretty tight ship on that side of things, but it was definitely made on the cheap and some people can't handle all the stock footage and re-used animation cycles. It doesn't bother ME, but to many it's a flaw. And out of 130 episodes produced in a two-year cycle, some of them were definitely clunkers. As bad as "Mr. Ogg" on the TMNT side of things? Probably not. :lol: But there's a case to be made that while some episodes absolutely sparkle, others were not "well-written". That show, like many 1980s cartoons, is an example of the Whole being far greater then The Sum of Its Parts.

MOTU, Voltron, Transformers, G.I. Joe... all of those shows are still "iconic" but also very, very flawed. They're full of things that are objectively "bad" or done poorly, but is it fair to call them "bad shows"? I don't think so, I really think a person needs to grade on a curve because even the very best of that crop falls way, way short of what cartoon standards would become even 5 years later in a post-Batman world. Obviously they're imperfect, because standards were SO much looser back then, but they've all obviously "stood the test of time" because millions of people still enjoy them, even those who can clearly see the strings and Scotch tape holding them together.

To be perfectly honest, even though there are several cartoons from that era which I personally like better, it's very hard for me to think of one that was truly "better" or better-made than TMNT until Batman came along. The best I can come up with is the early seasons of "The Real Ghostbusters". That was probably the best cartoon show ever made until Batman insofar as quality of the scripts/writing, lack of editing and continuity errors, and the other things you cite as being able to judge and grade by. But even then, you can only really say that about the early couple of seasons, as once Slimer became the central focus the entire thing fell in the trash. So nothing is perfect. But yeah, as far as "Were any 1980s cartoons truly any better than TMNT?", RGB is all I can think of. And even with that show, the animation was a little stiff.

Point being, I think it's just not fair to say "If something was objectively never good, it can't possibly have stood the test of time" because that kind of statement ignores the fact that standards were a whole lot lower back then. The only fair thing to do is compare those things to their contemporaries and not what came after. Part of why Batman: TAS was the complete revelation that it was, was because people simply didn't try that hard ever before. After that, there was a rising tide in which everyone who made cartoons was expected to step their game up. But even with that, it took until the end of the 90s for that to become a universal standard. There were still a ton of 1990s cartoons that were written and executed more like late-80s cartoons.

I'unno, I think you get what I'm saying. Grading on a curve is necessary when discussing things of a bygone era, and it's not fair to say that they "Couldn't have stood the test of time" simply because they were laid down on a cracked foundation. Especially since tons of people do still enjoy those things without irony.

MY problem becomes, when people either dismiss or ignore those flaws entirely as in pretending they never existed, or act like anyone who doesn't still love those things Now as much as they did Then is some kind of Big Meanie out to spoil everyone's fun. "I loved it Then so I love it Now and I don't need any reason other than 'I loved it Then', that's good enough for me" IS rather childish in and of itself, but it depends on how far you're willing to take it. If a person just wants to enjoy that thing, then that's fine. If they start saying, "I want EVERYTHING to be like this because it's what I personally like," then they're no different from the Big Meanies.

In the case of TMNT, staying locked into the FW tone and style for everything would only hasten the brand's demise. Not only has it been done and RE-done, but too many people have been waiting impatiently for the brand to "grow up" already, and outside of the 1990 movie and the first couple seasons of 4Kids, it simply was never "allowed" to, and we can see how that hurts the brand in the way that every new "kid-centric" version that comes out gets a worse reception, and is ignored more quickly, than the last. We've seen how "the new kids" that are supposedly the audience simply don't stick around anymore, and how each new version pushes away a few more adults.

"Well, *I* like it silly and goofy, so I want ALL of it silly and goofy. SO HUH." That's MY problem with some people. They don't care one bit that they're sending the brand they claim to love directly into the sh*tter by refusing to see why that approach is flawed and that their opinion isn't the only one that matters. The cartoons, the IDW comics... "*I* like this approach, so if you don't like it, go screw." Opinions are one thing, but when the approach you love so much is actively and openly pushing people AWAY from the brand... well, at the very least, it only makes sense to consider changing course before it's too late.

I get the "loose standards" argument and the "iconic" argument, I really do. I just don't quite think they're all that appropriate to use when arguing wheter or not the show works on it's own merits, they're better used for arguing the show's place in pop culture or the larger franchise. Arguments like "It's the most well known and popular version so you have to respect it!" annoy the hell out out me, not just because it implies appeal to popularity, but more because it just represents a complete failure to actually defend the show based on what it is on it's own.

There is a minimum standard for what be expected for just about anything, no matter how small the budget or short on time it is. One might accept that the characters barely move a muscle, or a somewhat flimsy plot, or a little visual error that you'll miss if you blink, it's not a good thing that those happen but at the very least it might get overlooked rather easily. What shouldn't be expected is to have errors like an arm vanishing for a second, having the characters constantly act on information they shouldn't have or literally use like five still frames to stand in for a minute of missing animation.

The main problem I have with the Fred Wolf show is not that it is goofy or meant for kids, it's that it fails so often to meet even the most basic expections I would have of anything.

[Leo656]

I'm curious. Do you just not like any pre-Batman cartoon shows at all, then? Just asking.

I mean, to call a spade a spade, before that Batman show nobody on either side really gave a sh*t. "Cartoons were for little kids", and "Little kids don't notice or care", and that was that. There was like a mutual understanding that nobody was expected to Aim High. And again, MOST of those shows were a whole lot worse than Ninja Turtles in every single category.

I have a ton of problems with FW TMNT, but I also have to admit that in its time, it was miles ahead of just about everything else. That's why it became "iconic" to an entire generation while "C.O.P.S." is mostly forgotten and ignored, for example. You can't become so entrenched in the zeitgeist if you have NO value whatsoever. Lots and lots of shows of that era were "just" toy commercials of questionable merit, but most of them are almost entirely forgotten.

I agree, a thing should be able to stand on more than just its reputation, but I'd also argue that FW TMNT does that, to a point. Nothing "better" really existed before it, and it took something like Batman: TAS to dethrone it. That's already a pretty lofty bar. And it's not like we were all asleep at the wheel as we watched it. It definitely, to a point, earned its reputation by being legitimately ahead of its contemporaries. To say otherwise is a bit unfair. It pretty much smoked everything else at the time, and that's a simple statement of fact.

I do agree, though, that when pressed as to why they STILL like it, or why "Everything should be like FW", most people can't say much more than "I liked it when I was 6", or "It's the only TMNT most people care about" and that's very annoying. And even though I'm sort of "defending" it here, I definitely think it had its time and place and it's not "my" TMNT at all anymore, and if it were put in the ground and had cement poured over it, I'd be perfectly fine with that. I think in the long run, it did more harm than good by keeping the very idea of TMNT locked into people's minds as a "kids' thing". And that's a hard thing to forget or forgive.

[Vegita-San]

I do agree, though, that when pressed as to why they STILL like it, or why "Everything should be like FW", most people can't say much more than "I liked it when I was 6", or "It's the only TMNT most people care about" and that's very annoying. And even though I'm sort of "defending" it here, I definitely think it had its time and place and it's not "my" TMNT at all anymore, and if it were put in the ground and had cement poured over it, I'd be perfectly fine with that. I think in the long run, it did more harm than good by keeping the very idea of TMNT locked into people's minds as a "kids' thing". And that's a hard thing to forget or forgive.

And there in lies the never ending argument's crux.

without FW, TMNT would have been forgotten about. It was WAY too dark and basic to make it as anything other than a comic book, and probably would not have lasted past issue 30. If it came out now, it'd be a different story, but not back then.

And this is probably another reason why the mirager's hate everything else. as well as the reason why tmnt gets stuck in the kiddie corner so much that nick buys it.

I get all that argumentation. but, to say that the original show can't stand on it's own, or didn't have some kind of quality to it is laughable.
You try producing something that takes 6 months for one episode on the schedule they where under, and try not to have something go wrong. it would have been next to impossible.

[Leo656]

without FW, TMNT would have been forgotten about. It was WAY too dark and basic to make it as anything other than a comic book, and probably would not have lasted past issue 30. If it came out now, it'd be a different story, but not back then.

Y e a h but it's equally true that the Batman comics were about to be cancelled before the Adam West show came out, and that the show "saved" Batman and made him more popular than ever before. BUT, at the same time, when the winds shifted everyone recognized that it was time to let the past be The Past and go in a different direction. The comics of the 1970s weren't in any way beholden to the TV show from the 1960s, nor were the comics or the iconic film of the 1980s.

Point of fact, the Batman movie was in fact predicted to be a spectacular failure upon its announcement, because it was ASSUMED by everyone sight-unseen that it was simply going to be a redux of the Adam West show. And by 1987, nobody - NOBODY - wanted that kind of thing anymore. WB were in such a panic that they had to rush out an unfinished rough trailer with no score almost a year in advance of release, just to calm everyone down and say "Look, LOOK! It's not silly! See? It's for grown-ups!" And after that, everything was fine. We all know what happened after that. Before the movie, people were like "Man, it'd be awesome if Batman was ever as popular as he was in '66, but that'll never happen." And then the character's popularity after the '89 movie reached far, FAR greater heights than even the TV show had allowed for. But they'd have never pulled that off if they felt like they HAD to recreate the Adam West show in movie form, just because that show WAS once upon a time the most popular and remembered version of Batman. They knew they had to make a hard left turn, and it brought them untold riches and rewards. Everybody won pretty big on that deal, not least of all THE FANS.

Point being, while one interpretation of A Thing may in fact be responsible for bringing that thing to previously-unforeseen heights of popularity, you can't expect to squeeze that same tit forever. You have to evolve, you have to adapt... you HAVE to move on.

[neatoman]

I'm curious. Do you just not like any pre-Batman cartoon shows at all, then? Just asking.

I mean, to call a spade a spade, before that Batman show nobody on either side really gave a sh*t. "Cartoons were for little kids", and "Little kids don't notice or care", and that was that. There was like a mutual understanding that nobody was expected to Aim High. And again, MOST of those shows were a whole lot worse than Ninja Turtles in every single category.

I have a ton of problems with FW TMNT, but I also have to admit that in its time, it was miles ahead of just about everything else. That's why it became "iconic" to an entire generation while "C.O.P.S." is mostly forgotten and ignored, for example. You can't become so entrenched in the zeitgeist if you have NO value whatsoever. Lots and lots of shows of that era were "just" toy commercials of questionable merit, but most of them are almost entirely forgotten.

I agree, a thing should be able to stand on more than just its reputation, but I'd also argue that FW TMNT does that, to a point. Nothing "better" really existed before it, and it took something like Batman: TAS to dethrone it. That's already a pretty lofty bar. And it's not like we were all asleep at the wheel as we watched it. It definitely, to a point, earned its reputation by being legitimately ahead of its contemporaries. To say otherwise is a bit unfair. It pretty much smoked everything else at the time, and that's a simple statement of fact.

I do agree, though, that when pressed as to why they STILL like it, or why "Everything should be like FW", most people can't say much more than "I liked it when I was 6", or "It's the only TMNT most people care about" and that's very annoying. And even though I'm sort of "defending" it here, I definitely think it had its time and place and it's not "my" TMNT at all anymore, and if it were put in the ground and had cement poured over it, I'd be perfectly fine with that. I think in the long run, it did more harm than good by keeping the very idea of TMNT locked into people's minds as a "kids' thing". And that's a hard thing to forget or forgive.

The first three seasons of the Simpsons pre-date Batman TAS and since you mentioned Voltron at one point, I guess anime like Macross counts. Lots of animated movies, such as the Little Mermaid, as well. If we're gonna be a little more strict and say only TV-shows made for children and from countries west of Soviet, south of Indonesia and east of Japan... There's actually a couple of French things I like, such as Tintin, I would consider well made. And on the American side I guess we have Ducktales and Rescue Rangers. This is of course going by the metric of well made and not just "do I like it?", because I think I already made that distinction.

There is course stuff I like that isn't exactly good, the only good part about the Heavy Metal movie is the soundtrack and (arguably) the animation, but I still like it despite being a total mess. It's just that here we're talking about a show I don't like and is blatantly flawed. It's correct that the Fred Wolf show is better than Transformers G1, GI Joe, He-Man or a bunch of other contemporary cartoons. (Although the truth is that's actually more contempory with BTAS, as seasons 6-8 aired parallel with it's entire run, actually outlasting it by almost two years. So the more you think about it, it is kind of weird to instead compare the quality of FW with Transformers and He-Man when those shows actually ended before it even started.) It's just that I don't think that is enough to give it a pass. Just because you weren't expected to well, doesn't mean you shouldn't try as hard as possible.

[Leo656]

It's correct that the Fred Wolf show is better than... He-Man...

I swear to GOD that I will hit my finish on you.

[neatoman]

I swear to GOD that I will hit my finish on you.

Fine geesh, they're.... What's the answer that will prevent me from experiencing harm?

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

What's He-Man?

Is that anything like a shemale?

[Leo656]

Fine geesh, they're.... What's the answer that will prevent me from experiencing harm?

"They both captivated an entire generation and outperformed beyond any limitations or expectations, and in spite of their many flaws are held as the Gold Standard of their respective brands by millions and millions of people, and together they defined an entire decade of children's entertainment." That'll do nicely.

Any other path leads to spike-city. It's a grapevine DDT, too, so you'd only have one arm to try and post with, AND I sweep the near leg so you're off-balance on the way down. I'd absolutely kill a guy if they weren't ready for it. :tgrin:

I invented it! Probably. I mean, some Japanese guy probably did it first a hundred years ago, like usual, but *I'D* never seen it before. And if I haven't seen it, it's new to ME! :lol::trazz:

But yeah, better tread carefully, I get a little sloppy sometimes. :tgrin::tgrin::tgrin: I love you, but... I've spiked guys for way less. :lol:

What's He-Man?

Is that anything like a shemale?

https://media.tenor.com/images/d55402e34ac4acf07f10b756e945482f/tenor.gif

[Musashi]

I think my entire life probably revolved around He-Man when I was aged about 5-7. I say that like I'm somehow better now.

Still got a couple of the Ladybird little hardcover books, UK edition. The Iron Master and A Trap For He-Man. Love the artwork - it makes Eternia such a cool place, even more so than the cartoon.

Question - Mechaneck. In the episode that details his origin story... Why is he already called Mechaneck before the accident that hurts his neck and makes it necessary to make it bionic? I suppose there might be something self-fulfilling in it... You know, "Your name... It gives me an idea..."

[Leo656]

That's one of the many, many mysteries of the He-Man universe! :lol:

Definitely some self-fulfilling properties happening over there, though. As if Mo-Larr would ever be anything BUT Eternia's Dentist. :trazz:

What an odd place to live.

And yeah, in scoping around online it turns out there are many, many, MANY people who far prefer the Eternia of the storybooks and first two years or so of mini-comics, rather than the more familiar animated series version. Can't really argue with that. The world and characters seen in print were much darker, primal, and more mysterious than the more sanitized version most people are familiar with. Some He-Man fans flat-out hate the cartoon. I don't, but I get their point completely.

[AquaParade]

He-Man always seemed like the dumbest thing in the world to me. "He-Man"??
Granted, I hardly gave it the time of day, but my ignorant opinion stands.

[Leo656]

That most certainly is a terrible opinion, yes.

If "Lord of the Rings meets Star Wars" is any dumber than "A bunch of turtles fell in a sewer and now they know kung-fu", then there simply is no God.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

That most certainly is a terrible opinion, yes.

If "Lord of the Rings meets Star Wars" is any dumber than "A bunch of turtles fell in a sewer and now they know kung-fu", then there simply is no God.

Does He-Man have a Mirage equivalent? Or was there only the Fred Wolf version of He-Man?

You mentioned DC comics, I think...?

Also, the Turtles know ninjitsu, you fvcking ape. :tlol:

[Leo656]

I assume they ALSO know kung-fu. They better.

The "Mirage Equivalent" of Masters of the Universe would be the first two years' worth of mini-comics that came with the action figures, as well as most of the early Golden Books storybooks. Back then it was much more Conan-like in the general aesthetic, and aside from the visuals of some of the main characters it had almost nothing to do with the cartoon show which came later.

Stuff like this, basically:
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51uORyIZ8LL._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
https://i.etsystatic.com/18308747/d/il/6046da/2479800185/il_340x270.2479800185_f2gj.jpg?version=0
https://d1466nnw0ex81e.cloudfront.net/n_iv/600/4368918.jpg
https://i.etsystatic.com/10003095/r/il/fe0304/2305389998/il_570xN.2305389998_2r7e.jpg

That was how it all basically went in the first few years. Which, you'll notice, bears only a very superficial similarity to Stuff Like This:
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0342/0081/products/He-man_grande.jpg?v=1585494609

And, just like with TMNT, there are people who have nothing but disdain for the cartoon show for "making everything a joke", and people who love the cartoon and give it all the credit for "making the brand popular and memorable".

Not altogether too different, insofar as being an essential 1980s property with a fractured fanbase. He-Man fans tend to seem... a LITTLE less divided on the whole, however. I don't post there but their forum is mostly free of a lot of the nonsense we get around here. They altogether seem a little bit more highbrow, as fanatics go. Friendlier. Slightly more educated. Also older, which probably connects everything. Most of the fans there are 35-45 and communicate accordingly.

But yeah, both brands have a lot in common (outside of just popularity), in that there was The Original Product Style, and then a Very Popular Cartoon Show which changed everything, and that cartoon was either the Best or Worst thing to ever happen to the brand depending on who you ask. Similar divisiveness. But He-Man fans don't seem to argue about it as much, that's what I notice. Less "bashing" going on of things they don't like. Just something I've noticed in general over there.

Considering their forum is WAY more active than this one is, that's actually no mean feat. But then they have a much more active mod/Admin system and their staff doesn't take any crap, so that probably has a lot to do with it, whereas this place has been a free-for-all for over a decade now.
---------------------------

EDIT:
I almost forgot to address your DC Comics query. Yeah, a lot of DC staff actually worked on some of the early mini-comics, but then DC also published an "official" three-issue mini-series in the early-80s to kind of give the brand a "definitive" origin story (the brand had been around for like three years by then but Mattel was still mostly just winging it as far as the storyline went). But the DC Comic book went too far against what Filmation was working on for the cartoon show at the same time, so Mattel moved the license to Marvel where they did a completely DIFFERENT comic book, which was based entirely on the Filmation cartoon. It was okay. The DC one was a lot more "old-world", with a lot of "Lord of the Rings"-style aesthetic and everyone speaking "The Queen's English". They didn't have all the bugs worked out, yet.

Then DC got the rights to do comics again a few years ago, and have gone back to the darker, more violent roots of everything, and in some cases pushed it even farther, while still retaining everything from the cartoons. Kind of a "best of everything" approach. They're pretty good.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81cW8FeofgL.jpg

[neatoman]

When it comes to what little experience I have with He-Man, it comes across less like "Star Wars + Tolkien" and more like "Conan + Flash Gordon" or "DEN - Giant nude dong in your face all the time".

[Leo656]

Several things can be true at once. It's a very versatile and diversely-represented franchise.

It's Tolkien-esque in that the series' mythology spans over 5,000 years and has an "Epic Fantasy" setting. It's somewhat reminiscent of Flash Gordon in that He-Man's mom was an astronaut from Earth who ended up on Eternia by accident. It's like Star Wars in that there's Ancient Magic but yet it co-exists with laser swords and blaster rifles that shoot plasma beams. It's influenced by Conan because Obviously It's Influenced By Conan.

There's generally a lot going on, that's what's so great about it. It's like Every Cool Thing Ever got mixed into One Thing, and then they just gave the guy a giant magic sword.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Wait, so the toys predated the cartoon? I always assumed the cartoon came first.

[neatoman]

Wait, so the toys predated the cartoon? I always assumed the cartoon came first.

With most American 80/90's cartoons you can assume the toys did come out first, or were at the very least the reason it got greenlit in the first place. In the case of He-Man, I'm pretty sure the toys were finalised before the show was even put into production. With Transformers the toys had been on the Japanese market for 2-3 years before Hasbro rebranded them for the American market and funded the cartoon.

[Leo656]

Wait, so the toys predated the cartoon? I always assumed the cartoon came first.

((Cracks Knuckles)) :tgrin::tgrin::tgrin:

They were in development alongside each other late in the game, but the toys came out several years ahead.

Under the name "Lords of Power", what would eventually become "Masters of the Universe" started development in the late-70s under Mattel. Mattel originally had a more generic fantasy concept in mind, with character's origins and alignment kept purposely vague so that kids could make up their own "story" during playtime. As things got closer to release around 1981, market research strongly suggested that kids actually wanted storylines for their action figures, to know who the Good Guys and Bad Guys were and why everyone was fighting. So Mattel had the idea to distribute mini-comics with each action figure, to better establish the world and characters, with the plan being for DC Comics to publish a full-fledged comic book as well.

Toys R Us, however, decreed to Mattel that "Kids don't read" and insisted that they get the story of the line out to kids by way of an animated special or something of that nature instead. That led to a meeting between Mattel and Filmation, which later led to the development of the cartoon show. However, the toys were already about to hit the market and the cartoon show was going to take a while to develop. Given that the original storyline for the toys was much more similar to Conan in nature, with a much darker and more "savage" look and feel, Filmation had reservations about this and in developing the cartoon they decided to make several drastic changes to the storyline to make it more suitable for younger kids. Mattel was okay with this, given that nothing had been entirely set in stone by this point anyway, although it resulted in quite a tangled web of characters and continuity since a ton of merchandise had already been produced before Filmation's "bible" for the cartoon had been written.

Therefore, the first wave of toys was finished and advertised in 1981 and debuted for sale in 1982, alongside a ton of books and other merchandise that were set in the "pre-Filmation" lore. The mini-comics that came with the toys set up some of the "basic" mythology, and the DC mini-series came out that July, ostensibly to "finalize" the brand's storyline. However, the Filmation cartoon was still in development, and their ideas were drastically different from what was already being presented in other media. Some bits of what would later become "hard canon" in all MOTU mythology were introduced in the DC mini-series, but most of the broad strokes were very different than what Filmation would later present. Since the Golden Books had already been solicited and developed almost entirely removed from what either DC or Filmation had been doing, they in turn continued along a mostly-disconnected path with only a passing resemblance to the world of the comics and cartoon show.

The Filmation cartoon was finalized and put on the air in 1983, with a much more comedic and "preschool-friendly" aesthetic than everything that had come before. It was still notable for being one of the first cartoon shows aimed at kids to allow for hand-to-hand combat, albeit much simplified and less "intense" than what had been shown in the books and comics. Epic sword battles with people swinging battle axes and maces and such were replaced mostly by basic wrestling throws and bloodless laser-gun action a'la "Star Wars". The "violence" in the show is quaint by any standard, but still caused quite an uproar back in '83, given He-Man's fondness for body-slamming enemies and the fact that he'd even punch them (with the iconic "He-Man Punches The Screen" stock footage shot being used in almost every single episode). "He-Man and the Masters of the Universe" immediately became the most popular cartoon on TV, and with that, the "Filmation Canon" went on to mostly supersede all of the previously existing MOTU mythology, and in most peoples' minds is the "official" version of the characters and story, despite coming out much later than everything else. Almost exactly like what happened with TMNT and the Fred Wolf series.

Once Filmation took off, their canon was retroactively applied to the toys, mini-comics, etc. Mattel moved the comic book license to Marvel for a "fresh start" since the DC books had been so different from Filmation. The Golden books remained in their own "pocket universe" but did apply SOME elements of the cartoon show, although on the whole their entire aesthetic and tone remained much more in line with the darker pre-Filmation works; they merely adopted a few of the character designs and story elements from the cartoon but avoided going full-blown "preschool".

So that's pretty much the long and short of it; there was only a two-year gap between the toys' debut and the Filmation debut, but a LOT happened in that two years resulting in no fewer than three (and even as many as five or six) disparate "canons" for Masters of the Universe by 1984.

One interesting thing is that the Filmation cartoon itself has become somewhat retroactively derided as being "simply a toy commercial", but frankly that doesn't apply very well. It absolutely was developed to bring awareness to the toys - and it was successful to a degree in that - however, the toy line went on to feature over 70 characters whereas the cartoon show mostly focused on a core group of less than a dozen for its entire two-year run. Characters who'd debuted before the cartoon show looked very different, and given how long episodes took to develop, MOST of the toys and vehicles for the toy line simply never appeared even once in the cartoon show. Likewise, almost none of the characters created for the show ever had toys made of them. Finally, the toy line both predated the cartoon show by almost two full years AND outlasted the cartoon by about three more years (although the cartoon still aired in syndicated repeats until 1990 depending on where you lived).

Thus, given how independent they toys and cartoon show were from each other for much of the toys' existence, it's kind of an oversimplification to dismiss the show as "just a commercial for the toys" because while it raised awareness for sure through its popularity, it simply didn't represent the toys very well at all. It merely pushed the popularity of the brand name through the roof, which obviously helped the toys to sell, but on the whole, there was almost no cross-over and very little in common between them.
----------------

It's a really great brand with a very fascinating history. The fact is, most of the other popular 80s brands like TMNT and the "Real American Hero" version of G.I Joe simply wouldn't have ever existed without it. It created the 5.5-inch scale market for action figures (rather than the 3.5 scale of Star Wars and G.I. Joe), made playsets and vehicles as important as the action figures, had an overall "lore" for everything, was the first cartoon show to allow "violence", and started the trend of cartoon shows trying to instill life lessons to kids and be more than "just a toy commercial". Pretty much every popular cartoon and toy line for the rest of the 1980s owes a debt to the MOTU brand in some pretty significant ways, because it opened up a ton of doors and broke a lot of new ground. Without it, you simply can't have most of what came later. And that's always very interesting.

Like, there's a VERY good chance that TMNT as we know them wouldn't ever have existed without MOTU. It always amazes and vexes me that there's a strong "rivalry" of sorts among the two fandoms, because personal preference of subject matter aside they really have more in common than not. But without MOTU, it's very unlikely that a TMNT cartoon or even a toy line would ever have come to pass, or if they did, they wouldn't have had any resemblance whatsoever to what we actually got. Pretty much everything about the TMNT toys and FW cartoon leans heavily on what Mattel did with MOTU, and out of all the 1980s popular brands they're the two with the most in common. The connections might not be superficially obvious given the dramatically different subject matter, but they're absolutely there, from the size/scale of the toys and all the way down the line.

Which I always think is neat. It wasn't until I got older that I found out that while a lot of He-Man fans still liked TMNT, a lot of TMNT fans really, REALLY hate He-Man. :ohwell: That makes me sad, because it seems silly to make it a "competition", but it mostly seems to be a generational thing. Older fans don't care, younger fans just want their preferred brand to "win" or be more popular. Seems silly, but that's how people are.

[AquaParade]

I always did like like Skeletor.

[Leo656]

He's got an exposed skull for a head/face; I think if that doesn't tickle something within a person then that person is simply dead inside.

Personally a big, big fan of the "demonic red glowing eyes" variant as originally illustrated very early on. They did away with that pretty quick... "too scary for the kiddies" and all that. But it looks so damn cool that way. I'm glad they brought it back for the newer toys.

"Skull Face" is a nice visual. "Skull Face + Burning Red Eyes" is just plain amazing.

https://www.poeghostal.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/alcala_skeletor.jpg

((((Swoon))))

[newfan]

Well, a thread about a show that may never happen can only last so long anyway.. :lol: I don't mind the derail though, I found that read on He-Man history quite interesting, seen as it's one of my childhood shows, might well be favourite actually but I haven't sat and ranked them :)
Not sure what the situation is with the movie that was planned.

As as the reason for the thread, not sure how much weight he has but I guess it still brings the point up for whatever it's worth. Hopefully it can be a possibility at some point.

[Leo656]

Movie was stalled, again. It got closer than ever before until the pandemic happened, now it's in holding because they might not have the money to make it.

IF it happens, it'll be for Netflix, and was already more or less guaranteed to be for Netflix and not theatrical even before the pandemic. It was supposed to be announced by now, and all the new He-Man toys coming out this year and next were supposed to be just the lead-in for the Big Announcement of the live-action film, but now, the movie - yet again - might not happen at all.

The fact is, "Origins" and everything else coming out probably wouldn't have been greenlit at all, if they weren't thisclose on finally having a movie out. It was all supposed to kinda tie in... the toys, the Kevin Smith animated project, the other Netflix animated series, and the live-action film. It was all part of this grand plan for two years' worth of new MOTU products with the movie being the cherry on top.

We'll have to wait and see. They got really, really close this time. They just don't have any money to make it, right now, and probably won't until the entire movie business stabilizes. One of a hundred projects that got screwed up thanks to COVID.

At least all the other stuff is still happening more or less on schedule. The new toys are great, the animated stuff... ehhh, people are waiting to see more of substance before making up a hard opinion (most MOTU fans are VERY nervous about Kevin Smith's involvement in the one project). The movie sounded like they wanted to do it right, so that's encouraging. For the longest time, there was internal debate as to whether the movie should be campy and goofy like the cartoon show or more of a straight-up Epic Fantasy movie a'la Conan. The issue being, people will expect certain things from the cartoon show to be in the movie (just like Bebop and Rocksteady on the TMNT side of things), but the cartoon itself is far too silly to turn into a movie for anyone but little kids, who completely do not care about He-Man (just like little kids don't care about TMNT, either). Meanwhile, the "more serious" approach has been pitched to the movie studios a hundred times, and while they mostly do want to go in that direction, every "serious" script for MOTU is just plain too expensive to film.

It's more or less the exact same problem the TMNT brand keeps running into. Someone says, "We should make a more grounded approach with the movie, for the older fans." But there's this Really Popular Cartoon Show from way back when we were kids, and thus the kids who grew up on that want to see their favorite things represented and will cry bloody murder if they're not. So they try and develop a sort of "best of both" approach to the film, using elements from both the original material as well as the cartoons, but it turns out that such an approach is VERY expensive, and that the brand is so niche the studio doesn't expect to make a ton of money on it. So then someone in accounting raises their hand and says, "Why don't we just dumb it down and make it for little kids, then? It's cheaper." And then the older fans who make up 90% of the audience cry Foul, and insist they either want something "gritty" or "best of both" but definitely NOT another kids' movie... and the whole cycle starts over again with nothing really moving forward.

MOTU, TMNT... it's the exact same circular process, for the exact same reasons. And in both cases, it's a shame. By rights we could've and should've had at least ten good movie for each, by now, considering how popular they are and have been since they were created. There's just the eternal "Who is this movie REALLY for?" and "For God's sake, how much is this gonna cost?!" problems that keep things from ever really getting anywhere.
-----------

I feel like although it's off-topic, this is all VERY relevant to TMNT because the MOTU brand has gone through the exact same issues in its many years of existence (as detailed above). Not "similar" problems, the Exact Same Problems. Grittier origins, got popular through a kiddie cartoon, fractured fanbase, one side wants everything Kiddie and the other wants everything to go back to the roots, thus the brand-holders don't know who the hell they're even marketing to because both sides are extremely vocal about what they Do and Don't Like. They try and re-market it every few years for kids, but kids mostly don't care, but the premise is "silly" so they're afraid to aim for adults despite adults being the bulk of the people who still care. They try to skew things more "adult", but going for the little kids is cheaper (and might sell more toys).

It's all the exact same thing. Like I said, the He-Man fans have a bit more "Live and let live" attitude about the cartoons and stuff vs. the original material, as compared to TMNT fans where it's a never-ending "war" between Purists and Cartoon Fans. But both brands are strong bedfellows, with the same "behind-the-scenes" problems.

They're both completely different and yet Exactly The Same.

[newfan]

Too bad about the movie, I was hoping for a theatrical release but having it at all would be good at this point.
Of the upcoming shows, one is a CGI kids and the Smith series is anime...and older? seen as it continues the old toon story so no kids will be familiar.. don't remember an age rating being mentioned in the info.

I am only familiar with the old toon (okay watched the movie too) and am no expert, got to re-watch a little when I first got Netflix but then they took it off. I remember turning on the TV in the 90's and catching another version, I turned it off shortly after as I didn't like the look of it, though I can't judge on a couple of minutes :). I liked the images I saw when I searched the 2000s series though, I may look at that at some point.

[Leo656]

More or less correct, there's going to be an animated reboot AND A Kevin Smith project that allegedly picks up where the original 1980s cartoon left off, aimed at older fans with a more "mature" storyline and might even be rather violent. I guess since the original show didn't have a proper ending, this is an attempt to give it one. The voice cast is absolutely stellar - Mark Hammill, Lena Headley, Kevin Conroy, Sarah Michelle Gellar, just to name a few - but Kevin Smith's history of writing for licensed properties is pretty abysmal. So people WANT to be excited, but Smith's track record is bad. This is the guy who made Batman piss himself, after all. His idea of a "more mature" He-Man series might conflict greatly with what "real fans" want or expect to see.

Again, swap "MOTU" for "TMNT" and "Kevin Smith" for "Seth Rogen", and look where we are! Same exact stuff going on. It's uncanny! I kinda love it, honestly.

- There was indeed a second He-Man cartoon in the early-90s, "The New Adventures of He-Man". It was made by entirely different people than the Filmation series despite ostensibly being set in the same universe, just "a few years later". It abandoned ALL of the Epic Fantasy trapping for a straight-up "Star Wars" ripoff with He-Man following Skeletor into space where they both settled on the planet Primus to have all new adventures - with "Star Wars" being pretty much dead at that time and the Fantasy genre also being on the way out at the end of the 1980s, Mattel felt that there was a hole in the market that they could plug He-Man into and have the "Epic Space Fantasy" market to themselves.

Problem was, the cartoon and toys were TOO drastically different from the originals, so fans like myself really just didn't care about it. It may as well have been a completely brand new thing and not called "He-Man" at all, there was NO common ground between them at all. So both the "New Adventures" cartoon and toy line died a pretty quick death and never came anywhere close to the success of the originals.

Having finally sat down to watch the entire "New Adventures" cartoon series as an adult, it's... "Okay". For what it is, it's fine. It just has so little in common with "real" He-Man that it has almost no appeal for anyone, it's just a thoroughly mediocre Star Wars ripoff. Although it's probably the best Star Wars ripoff ever, I guess? For whatever that's worth. Like I said, it's "fine", but... who is it for? I'unno. As a kid, I just plain hated it. It wasn't even the shift in concept that bothered me - "Conan + Star Wars" to "Just Plain Rip Off Star Wars" was jarring, but the sci-fi fantasy was always in there from Day One. It was just altogether TOO different.

I mean, the toys kinda sucked, and that was a huge deal. They were so much smaller, skinnier, and less fun than the originals. They were so... generic. You couldn't even mix the 1982 He-Man toys with the 1990 He-Man toys, and for me and many kids that just ruined the entire thing. I would have definitely at least bought a couple of the toys if they were in-scale with the originals, that would've been great.

- The 2003 revamp was MUCH better. For many people, it's their all-time favorite version of the MOTU franchise. It was entirely familiar to fans of the original show but left all the silliness in the past (to the point where some people think it's "too serious" and loses some of its charm, but I don't agree with that at all). It's like a perfect blend of the Golden Books and the Filmation cartoon.

I can't say I like it more than the original - I can't really be fully objective about a show I watched two-to-four times a day every single day for five or six f*cking years as a kid, after all - BUT, by any objective measure it IS a much, much better show, it just lacks some of the things that made the original so memorable with kids. And I think anyone who maybe likes the basic concept of "Epic Fantasy + Science Fiction" but thinks that what they've seen of the Filmation cartoon is too goofy, would do well to at least watch the first few episodes of the 2003 cartoon series. If they don't like it, then He-Man simply isn't for them, and that's fine, BUT it does a great job of illustrating that the premise itself need not be "silly", that you can take the exact same premise and characters and do a PG-13 version of it without any trouble at all. It's actually quite a gritty and violent show for a kids' cartoon. I mean, there's no blood, but Keldor (who becomes Skeletor) gets his face melted off with acid in the very first episode and that pretty much sets the tone for the entire series. No goofy stuff here! Frankly, there's SO much action in the series that some people find it exhausting. I don't agree, but it's an opinion.

Once again... it's very thematically similar to what the 4Kids TMNT cartoon did at almost the exact same time. :) Take the original stuff, mix in some of the older cartoon but not TOO much, polish it up, make it "darker" and more violent, aim it at the fans who were kids back in the 80s and appeal to their sensibilities as young adults, and BAM - Magic Happens. Like I keep saying, it's kinda funny how the two brands are so often in step with one another in so many ways.

What's funny about the 2003 MOTU cartoon, though, is that it's VERY much a toy commercial, WAY more than the original Filmation one ever was. :lol: Like there are entire episodes centered around vehicles and "battle armor" variants from the toy line and all'a that stuff. It's very transparent. Doesn't bother me at all, it's just funny... the original show is often derided as a "toy commercial", despite doing a rather poor job of that, while the 2003 cartoon is heralded as being "more mature" while ALSO being a thousand times more blatant at shilling toys within the running time of the episodes. :lol: It's amazing!

[newfan]

Kinda sold on checking out 2k3, happy to skip New Adventures.

[Leo656]

Kinda sold on checking out 2k3, happy to skip New Adventures.

I mean, New Adventures in and of itself is NOT a bad little cartoon, for what it is. I was very shocked as an adult to find out that I didn't hate it. Like any other show, SOME episodes are absolute dogsh*t but there's a lot of good ones, too. The animation is far more sophisticated than the original series, the music is good... Skeletor has a completely different personality and voice to the point where he's basically a totally different character than the Skeletor everyone knows, but he's incredibly entertaining. Like he legit saves the show all on his own. The writers were very open in admitting that since the Batman movie was a hit at the time "New Adventures" was in development, they basically made Skeletor exactly like Jack Nicholson's Joker. It works fine; it's in no way the same character anymore, but he's a fun villain.

But then, Skeletor is a microcosm for the entire series. SO different from the original that even if it's good... what's the point, exactly? Old fans won't recognize or like it, and new fans won't care about the old thing so even the name itself has no intrinsic value.

What happened - and Mattel has since admitted that this was a huge mistake - was that in developing "New Adventures", they focus-grouped and solicited the opinions specifically of kids who knew nothing about the original toys or cartoon, because they wanted a "brand new audience". And among that group of kids, the toys and cartoons tested off the charts; Mattel completely expected NA to be a huge hit, based on research data. When it actually hit the market, however, it all tanked. New kids didn't care - they were too busy watching TMNT to care about anything else at that exact moment in time - and the older fans hated everything about it.

Since then, Mattel has repeatedly admitted that throwing out the baby with the bathwater was a huge mistake, and that their fatal flaw was in guessing they didn't need the support of older fans; they assumed that they could just create a new audience out of thin air anytime they wanted to. They haven't made that mistake since. They tried hard to appeal to the kids of 2003 with that relaunch, BUT they also mostly aimed it at older fans from the '80s... which was wise, because the little kids in 2003 didn't bite.

I've often said that Nick/Viacom would do well to heed these lessons and apply them to the TMNT brand. You CAN'T just go about trying to whip up a new audience of 5-year olds every few years and "If the older fans hate it, Oh Well". Things don't work that way. It makes much more sense to start with the fans you already have in your pocket, and work backwards from there. If you make things too alien and unfamiliar, you're going to lose people who really want to care. It's inevitable. And you CAN'T just say, "Eh, we'll make even more new fans, so we can afford to lose some." That never, ever, EVER works.

[frank_one]

He's got an exposed skull for a head/face; I think if that doesn't tickle something within a person then that person is simply dead inside.

Personally a big, big fan of the "demonic red glowing eyes" variant as originally illustrated very early on. They did away with that pretty quick... "too scary for the kiddies" and all that. But it looks so damn cool that way. I'm glad they brought it back for the newer toys.

"Skull Face" is a nice visual. "Skull Face + Burning Red Eyes" is just plain amazing.

https://www.poeghostal.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/alcala_skeletor.jpg

((((Swoon))))Fun fact: Skull-face is a character by Robert Howard, the creator of Conan the barbarian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull-Face

[newfan]

Funny you mention Skeletor being so different in appearance and voice Leo, it was at his appearance that I sat thinking 'what?' and turned the channel. I wasn't really watching toons at the time though.

Anyway, I will bow out at this point and let TMNT commence.

[Leo656]

Fun fact: Skull-face is a character by Robert Howard, the creator of Conan the barbarian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull-Face

Yes indeed! It's all connected and all very, very cool.

[Galactus]

I quite like New Adventures but it really isn't a He-Man show but I have to say their version of Skeletor is one of my favourites. I love how he subtly manipulates his way into being leader of the mutants and the power play between him and Flogg throughout the series.

I'd actually forgive NA a lot if the parts of the first episode that were set on Eternia used traditional designs to start off with like the mini comics which have an explanation for the changeover. Actually I'm rather fond of a few of the German/UK comics which gave an interesting take on the changeover. I've always been curious to see what the planned Filmation version of what would become NA would turn out like.

[shredder orokusaki]

After the failure of Rise evryone realized that it needs to be at least as serious as the 2012 or 2003 seires are for it to becoem a success(or even as serious as IDW and mirrage comcis are) and not like Rise. 1987 series is 1000 times better.

[UsagiYoJimBelushi]

cant wait for last ronin!!!!

[Venom]

He-Man stuff cause MOTU is cool

Remember the Greyskull script floating around the web in the mid-2000s? That would have made a decent MOTU film reboot!

[Leo656]

Yeah, that was pretty good.

There's allegedly been several good-to-great scripts floating around, they're all just "too expensive" for a niche property that they don't expect a big return on. :ohwell:

[Venom]

Yeah, that was pretty good.

There's allegedly been several good-to-great scripts floating around, they're all just "too expensive" for a niche property that they don't expect a big return on. :ohwell:

Yet Vin Diesel was able to get "The Last Witch Hunter" made.

I don't understand the trepidation behind it. Transformers seems to be a bigger risk than He-Man, and those movies made gangbusters!

[Leo656]

By all accounts it's the whole fantasy/"naked barbarian" thing.

The era of D&D-style "Epic Fantasy" was the 1980s, and it kind of went out with that decade. "Lord of the Rings" did huge business, but that's considered a huge fluke by most people working in the entertainment industry, especially given how the Hobbit prequels under-performed compared to expectations and every other fantasy series that was attempted since then died on the vine almost immediately. General thinking among the pencil-pushers is, "Nobody wants swords and sorcery anymore", thus they're not going to risk $100 million on a movie based on a toy line from 40 years ago with its own fractured and nitpicky fanbase.

I kinda do see their point, I just don't agree with it.

Less of a factor, but still a factor, is the whole "naked barbarian" thing. In some ways, people have matured and gotten more intelligent in the last few decades, but in other ways they've become more immature. Back in the 80s with the Conan, Red Sonja and other fantasy stuff at the forefront of pop culture entertainment, you could have a muscle-bound warrior in a loincloth carrying a big sword and MOST people just said, "Hey, that's bad-ass!" But consider how prominent the "He-Man is Gay" meme has become in the last ten years, and it tells you a lot about WHY Hollywood is wary of moving forward on any sort of live-action project. In the present day, in spite of how "progressive" we've supposedly become, if you present the He-Man character to kids (and even some alleged adults), the typical response is, "Some muscle guy in a loincloth? Dude, that's gay." :roll:

That's them projecting their own insecurity - and "Meme Culture" certainly hasn't helped one bit - but that's the way things are right now. The cultural climate simply isn't open to accommodating that sort of thing. I mean, several theatrical movies about Hercules failed semi-recently, and one of them starred The Rock, even. If a movie starring The Rock doesn't make a zillion dollars, it simply means that audiences don't want the material.

I get it. I just don't like it. To some degree, it's like in pro wrestling, where you can get the audience to cheer for just about anything if you "train" and condition them properly - see how comic book movies went from being "too risky" to becoming the ONLY movies that make money anymore practically overnight - but that genre of entertainment simply isn't worth the risk according to Hollywood, thus they're not going to do the work to try and "make it cool".

Giant robots, on the other hand, are always an easy sell even when the material is dreck. Frankly, I know what *I* think is cooler but I'm always gonna be outvoted on that.