Older Fans on Rise Vs the '87 Toon

[PizzaPower1985]

Admittedly, I have seen very little of Rise of the TMNT, but... Do some of you older fans think you would have become a TMNT fan at all (casual, life-long etc.) if Rise (or something closer to it) had aired in 1987 when you were a kid instead the 1987 show? Granted, Rise is a very different conception than the 87 show (especially the pilot) was. And the 87 show is closer to E&L's concept.

IF in 1987 that 5-episode pilot had skewed even younger and been closer to what Rise is... would you have stuck with TMNT or been a fan at all?

[sdp]

Cartoons in the 80s were trash for the most part, most cartoons from any era after would've faired excellent just for not being some boring predictable preachy show that is badly animated.

[Powder]

It's colorful, funny, action packed, & full of monsters. Anything fitting that mold, I'm here for it.

[CyberCubed]

The humor of kids cartoons today is very different than it was in the 80's. It's hard to describe, but modern cartoons have a lot of "screaming" and "overreactions."

Old cartoons went with more subtle humor and dry sarcastic wit. You can tell the clear difference from the humor in the original cartoon and in Rise or even the 2012 Nick series. They were products of their time.

[IMJ]

The humor of kids cartoons today is very different than it was in the 80's. It's hard to describe, but modern cartoons have a lot of "screaming" and "overreactions."

Modern cartoon humor is more self-centered. It comes from a "YOLO" perspective and from a perspective of self-empowerment. That's part of the reason it doesn't appeal to me as much. These shows are more focused on the "already existing and powerful YOU" rather than striving to be better. Pay real close attention to the direction of the humor and the reactions and you'll start to see the nuance of the zeitgeist. It's incredibly self-centered and leads people to greater egos rather than leading them to see something better than themselves and striving to become that better picture.

[garsh]

It's almost a 100% sure thing to me that my fandom wouldn't have been impacted by Rise in the 80s, but I would be more tolerant of the show itself. I was already a fan of the turts just based on the original NES game ad I saw, and the action figures I was already collecting. At the time I didn't even like the cartoon very much, at least after the mini-series. Today I appreciate it more than I did then.

[Leo656]

Admittedly, I have seen very little of Rise of the TMNT, but... Do some of you older fans think you would have become a TMNT fan at all (casual, life-long etc.) if Rise (or something closer to it) had aired in 1987 when you were a kid instead the 1987 show? Granted, Rise is a very different conception than the 87 show (especially the pilot) was. And the 87 show is closer to E&L's concept.

IF in 1987 that 5-episode pilot had skewed even younger and been closer to what Rise is... would you have stuck with TMNT or been a fan at all?

Oh, geez, a new thread that isn't Cubed doing his gimmick. :lol:

Nah, I wouldn't have ever been a fan if "Rise" or something like it was the first thing I'd seen of TMNT. As it was, I already didn't wanna like TMNT when it came out in the 80s. All the kids at school were talking about it and to me, it seemed like the dumbest premise I'd ever heard of. Just being honest. I was already very elitist and self-righteous at a very young age and this thing called "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" just sounded dumber than dumb.

I only got into it by accident when my first-grade class had one of those "book and tape" gimmicks that transcribed the first episode, and kids who were done with their work early got to either mess with those or play with blocks or whatever. My one friend insisted that I check it out, and I did, and then that day I went home and watched the cartoon and after that I was hooked.

But given how I already went into it thinking the basic premise was stupid, and that only the specific execution of the show was what won me over, and that aside from Loony Tunes I've never had much of an appetite for "zany", if something like "Rise" was the very first thing I was exposed to, I would have absolutely hated it, to the point where even if a "better", more serious show came out later on, there's no way I'd be objective enough to give it a chance. It would have poisoned me against the brand forever.

Taste is subjective, so if the style of "Rise" appeals to people then that's fine for what it is. For me, it's just about Everything I Hate about modern cartoons in general, and there's absolutely nothing about it that appeals to me.

Just being honest.

[Autbot_Benz]

No I wouldn't

[DVSleeSmooth]

I don't think it would've been the phenomenon the 80s show was. For one modern humor relies on self awareness more than the references/wit in the 80s and Rise kinda goes more out with the concept than "wOaah mutant turtles AND there ninjas eufwunnwduduwndw". I'm not trying to diss the 80s show either cause I think that was a huge part of appeal (along w/ toys but yeah).


Ok however I think its animation would be a HIGH advantage compared to other shows from that time. While I don't think people would fully appreciate the structure of the show the animation would definetly catch alot of kids attention. And if the toys were higher quality and more produced in this alternative universe it could have made another TMNT rennisance. On the other hand it couldve been a niche show that in retrospect would be praised for things not common or substantial in the 80s

However this would have a bad effect on TMNT the brand I think. even though the 90s movie took inspiration from the Comics idk if the aspects from rise would fuse well with the aspect from the 90s movie and it would take a looong time to make a proper Rise movie (doubtfull on this paragraph besides last sentence tho) also a more Magic influenced brand on the series




TLDR: I dont think everyone would truly appreciate it at the time but Rise would go down as influential in retrospect for aspects like the high quality animation and action and would age extremely well. though some aspects might conflict later on (Sorry for writing lowkey a essay :tlol::teek:

[Luckyday]

I became a fan in 2010 but not because of the 2k3 series. It was actually because of a Cracked article.:lol:

https://www.cracked.com/article_18906_7-shockingly-dark-origins-lovable-childrens-characters.html

For me as a edgy teenager, it was like coming across a giant cartoon conspiracy and I just had to see it and read it for myself. I remember look frantically for any Mirage related content.

I am only start watching the 87 cartoon out of morbid curiosity and so far the first season is pretty okay. There are some moments where it look like straight out of a Zelda CDI game. :teek:

I really think it would been impossible for Rise to look the way that it is now in 87. Even if it was only produce solely through Toei Animation, it would still look a completely different beast all together.

But I think I would have watch as long it still had a lot of anime influence within its animation like it does now. I was a huge fan of Dragon ball and Dragon ball Z back in the day.

[IndigoErth]

Without having any Turtle that feels relatable to hook me... prob not. I might have watched it as a kid, I dunno, but if so, then probably in the same superficial way of most cartoons these days... as an easily forgettable distraction for a few minutes that you don't care two cents about the second it's over. (And lord that's the last thing I want for the TMNT.)

The 87 show may have been goofy and very much a product of its time and far from being a masterpiece, but it's sincere in what it was trying to be; it is unintentionally a bit derpy and glitchy which is amusing now. Now what passes for humor in a lot of "modern" cartoons, including Rise, just feel too forced. Being derpy on purpose is just kind of annoying, feels artificial, and not so funny.

I mean it's not like it's just a problem with cartoons. Look at those last films... The so-called attempts at humor there also seem too forced. It's like they don't know how to make humor seem natural anymore.

[triplexxx]

It's pretty hard to try and recreate my mindset from when I was that age. However, with the crude-type humor, and not so down-to-earth feel, and way too flashy looks, the answer is probably no, it would not have left a lifelong impression on me. Saw a lot of things in the 80s and 90s that may have intrigued me, but in the end I considered to be "just ok", which is probably how I would've felt about this at best.

[Sumac]

Haven't seen Rise at all, I can't say for sure, but going by the art style alone, I don't think, I would've been fan of it.

I prefer more realistic style of animation, not going all stretch'n'wacky ****. Or at least something that sits in the middle.

[PizzaPower1985]

I dont think the particular humor of Rise would have been there in the 80's but if 87 TMNT had looked more Ren & Stimpy and been closer to those SPACED OUT! Mirage comics, I would have seen TMNT more as a funny animal toon and I definitely would have been LESS inclined to buy the toys, watch the movie or beg my mom for that $30 TMNT lunchbox (yes it was $30 in 1991 only because inside were some stickers and TMNT school supplies).

If the 87 toon pilot, which i kind of adore, had been as bad as Rise is IMO, I think I never would have cared to pursue TMNT toys or ever discover the INCREDIBLE, AMAZING BRILLIANCE that is the E&L Mirage canon.

This may be hard to believe BUT in 1991 I knew A LOT of 5 to 6 year old kids in the Indianapolis area (my hometown) that COULD NOT GET INTO, UNDERSTAND, OR GIVE 2 SH*TS about TMNT! And I have no idea why?

[Luckyday]

I don't mind goofy and visual slapstick humor. The only time I hate it when there is a noticeable pattern like a character said something stupid and other character hits him for said stupid comment. That gets old after a while. That is one reason why I don't like humor in other versions.


but I appreciate when the humor is more dialogue base. 2012 TMNT have some genuine funny moments like in season 1 that are between characters arguing or just someone pointing something out.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I suspect not. The cartoons that I liked best were the serious-leaning, story-driven shows: The Real Adventures of Jonny Quest, Batman, and Ninja Turtles.

Rise of the TMNT simply wouldn't have cut it.

[Leo656]

Humor of any kind is so subjective. What makes one person bust a gut makes the person next to them roll their eyes and groan.

And that is exactly why "humor" of any kind should NOT be part of the bedrock for ANY iteration of TMNT. You can obviously have humor IN there but if you make "being funny" the entire point, the absolute best you're gonna do at pleasing a larger audience is 50/50. And usually a lot less than that.

[IMJ]

Admittedly, I have seen very little of Rise of the TMNT, but... Do some of you older fans think you would have become a TMNT fan at all (casual, life-long etc.) if Rise (or something closer to it) had aired in 1987 when you were a kid instead the 1987 show? Granted, Rise is a very different conception than the 87 show (especially the pilot) was. And the 87 show is closer to E&L's concept.

IF in 1987 that 5-episode pilot had skewed even younger and been closer to what Rise is... would you have stuck with TMNT or been a fan at all?

Wow, interesting thing to consider.

But..... hmmm. No. I don't think I would've been a fan. Rise is clearly a marker of this generation, not of ours. And I respect that, I do. But I don't respect the markers that make it true - the self-empowerment that leads to ego inflation for fans that is present in these modern shows is completely different than the reinforcement and striving to be better that were markers of 80's culture. I'm not saying that 80's culture was purely better or without nonsense - it certainly had it's fair share of nonsense in kids programming, but the character dynamics and subtleties had a different heart to them. And so I'm not saying that as a kid I would've comprehended what I'm saying now as an adult, but I am saying that Rise would have been the odd-man out as far as content zeitgeist goes and I wouldn't have thought it was "cool".

As for the animation? Again modern animation is for the Attention Deficit Disorder crowd. It's a series of flash animation punctuated by frame-rate changes that serves digestion of quick impulses as opposed to anything fully constructed and uniform that serves digesting a narrative. And I hate that it's like that because it makes me sound like a Luddite when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

So I see Rise in a manner where the show itself is a joke on moving celluloid which I wouldn't have liked, as opposed to the FW show which was an action show full of jokes even if they were a little lame from time to time. Rise is a show for kids who will grow up with egos greater than the millenials who, as kids themselves widely got trophies even in failure and then grew up to make a show like Rise. FW TMNT was a show for kids that was widely pervasive for it's wild consumerism yet still managed to yield characters that made people want to grow outside of their framework and better themselves which is what most of our generation's cartoons did. What I've described here is the nature of modern shows (Rise) versus 80's shows (FW TMNT). One group gets told they are all already special and to challenge even their friends with their specialness while the other show was corny but handed out a framework of brotherhood to develop from. It's a subtle difference in content.

[ZariusTwo]

If I was a kid now, I'd probably be reading a lot more. These days people only watch cartoons and movies for the same thing...memery and everything a product does is to sell those moments for the social media hits.

Call out the '87 cartoon all you will for product placement, at least it gave us something to stir up an imagination.

[Luckyday]

Wow, interesting thing to consider.

But..... hmmm. No. I don't think I would've been a fan. Rise is clearly a marker of this generation, not of ours. And I respect that, I do. But I don't respect the markers that make it true - the self-empowerment that leads to ego inflation for fans that is present in these modern shows is completely different than the reinforcement and striving to be better that were markers of 80's culture. I'm not saying that 80's culture was purely better or without nonsense - it certainly had it's fair share of nonsense in kids programming, but the character dynamics and subtleties had a different heart to them. And so I'm not saying that as a kid I would've comprehended what I'm saying now as an adult, but I am saying that Rise would have been the odd-man out as far as content zeitgeist goes and I wouldn't have thought it was "cool".

As for the animation? Again modern animation is for the Attention Deficit Disorder crowd. It's a series of flash animation punctuated by frame-rate changes that serves digestion of quick impulses as opposed to anything fully constructed and uniform that serves digesting a narrative. And I hate that it's like that because it makes me sound like a Luddite when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

So I see Rise in a manner where the show itself is a joke on moving celluloid which I wouldn't have liked, as opposed to the FW show which was an action show full of jokes even if they were a little lame from time to time. Rise is a show for kids who will grow up with egos greater than the millenials who, as kids themselves widely got trophies even in failure and then grew up to make a show like Rise. FW TMNT was a show for kids that was widely pervasive for it's wild consumerism yet still managed to yield characters that made people want to grow outside of their framework and better themselves which is what most of our generation's cartoons did. What I've described here is the nature of modern shows (Rise) versus 80's shows (FW TMNT). One group gets told they are all already special and to challenge even their friends with their specialness while the other show was corny but handed out a framework of brotherhood to develop from. It's a subtle difference in content.

I do get that was theme they were going for the entire first season, but they seem to drop it for "Family is Important" somewhere in the second half of season two.

[Mewzard]

While I was born in the 80s, I was born after the 87 Cartoon started, so I don't know if my early 30s ass counts for "Older Fan" in this scenario, lol.

It wouldn't have effected me at all, given my oldest TMNT memory is watching the 1990 movie, which had a big impact in what I wanted out of my TMNT (and probably why Mirage Volume 1 struck such a chord with me, given the first movie took a lot from the early issues).

But while I haven't watched a large chunk of Rise, what I did see I enjoyed, and probably would have enjoyed back in the early 90s where my memories of things start coming together.

[IMJ]

I do get that was theme they were going for the entire first season, but they seem to drop it for "Family is Important" somewhere in the second half of season two.

I mean you could be right about that shift in content, but I think the greater point is that current shows show kids how to inflate their own egos through the humor whereas older shows where less about "you are already perfect" and more about "this is how you grow to be better".

[Leo656]

I mean you could be right about that shift in content, but I think the greater point is that current shows show kids how to inflate their own egos through the humor whereas older shows where less about "you are already perfect" and more about "this is how you grow to be better".

Yeah, my wife and I were talking about that not long ago while watching He-Man.

I think it's very telling that the end-of-episode morals and such that were so standard back in the 80s cartoons are considered "corny" by so many now, despite the fact that only positive outcomes could ever come from putting those kinds of messages into kids' heads on a daily basis. And consider the source of the younger people who find such things "corny": Self-absorbed, narcissistic, Participation Trophy types who think "self-improvement" is buying a fancier cell phone.

It says a lot about the current group of young people, and nothing good. I think we'd do well to go back to how things used to be, frankly.

[IMJ]

Exactly.
And look at the direction of humor in cartoons? It's all about bringing a joke to bear that empowers the center of the show at the expense of another show character as a reflection of the empowerment. Distill that down. The lesson is that "you are better than other people who challenge you, so put them in their place". That's the distillation of it. It's basically a direction of humor that reinforces ego and arrogance and does so essentially through bullying examples. But we laugh when we watch it because it's parlayed as the joke. But it also informs societal direction.

I mean this isn't a podium I'd launch a criticism and hard argument from, but it's more of a sociological observation about the current zeitgeist that I definitely believe is reflective of the times. Arrogance. Personal ego. And no long avenues of respect. Instead it's about demanding respect in the face of oppression when it should be examples of respect in diverse team building. It's a message of conflict to kids from a generation who all got trophies as kids. You can see how f'd up the message becomes.

[Groverman62]

Not disagreeing with the points Aren't participation trophies something the generation before us came up with?

[IMJ]

Not disagreeing with the points Aren't participation trophies something the generation before us came up with?

I remember the earliest conversation about the "participation trophy" - I even remember it on the news when that kind of thinking was being adopted. IIRC it had to be the early-mid-90's. '93 maybe? I was in high school and I remember a barrage of news about that theory as it was being employed towards grammar school kids at the time. So technically the creators of using the "participation trophy for equal happiness for all!" were that parental unit that would be in their 50's today I'd guess.

And it was deployed on that generation who today would be in their mid to late 20's and and maybe up to mid 30's to some extent. Ironically a big cross section of the same group you see who can't manage politics and are tearing up the streets with inflated egos that they are "right" or otherwise can't handle what they perceive as "loss".

[CyberCubed]

I get the feeling Rise was purposely made so different because it came only a year after the Nick 2012 series ended and they didn't want to do another "standard" TMNT cartoon all over again after Nick had rebooted the series. So in that regard I can see why they went crazy with it and just did their own thing, it was way too soon for another TMNT cartoon as the kids who grew up with the 2012 series were just barely aging out of the demographic.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

If I'm being frank, I don't feel TMNT is popular enough as Batman or Spiderman to where they can radically experiment with it yet (which is partially why so many people were so antagonistic or apathetic towards Rise, myself included). For one, it'd help if casual fans at the very least familiarize themselves with some aspects of the comics like stuff with April's origin or City at War. I say "familiarize" because I know some people don't read comics despite learning about stories such as Killing Joke, The Dark Knight Returns, Knightfall, The Death of Superman, The Night Gwen Stacy Died, etc. I'm hoping The Last Ronin picks up some steam or makes some waves.

[MrPliggins]

Interesting question to consider. I haven't seen a second of Rise, but seeing the artwork and designs, I have little to no interest. But that's as a 40+ year old adult. I discovered TMNT at age 10, and I just might have liked it at that point.

[Leo656]

If I'm being frank, I don't feel TMNT is popular enough as Batman or Spiderman to where they can radically experiment with it yet

Not even close.

[ssjup81]

I've never seen Rise, so can't really say based on that. The main reason I never watched it is for a superficial one. I hate that style of art and seems it would be a bit too silly for my tastes, but as mentioned, I really don't know and can't say one way or the other. I'm also viewing it from the point of view of a nearly 40-year-old woman, not as a 7-year-old child.

With the original show, I first watched it while it was still syndicated, but not when the pilot aired and saw those eps later on in reruns. Kids at school were talking about the show (along with stuff like Alf lol) so I checked it out. I'm pretty sure I didn't start watching until 1988 or sometime after the pilot in '87. Since I didn't start with the pilot, I probably still would've watched it...but I probably would've stopped watching it after a while too once about 10 or so, maybe if it was aimed at a much younger audience.

For me, I watched up until CBS stopped airing Saturday morning programs in the earlier part of the 90s for my area. The shows were always pre-empted to show junk like Martha Stewart. The only way I could watch it, was through the ones they'd air on the USA Cartoon Express and I didn't even know of the season change to the Red Sky Arc until I visited my aunt one weekend (she lived in another city) and for her, CBS still aired Saturday morning kids shows. I was just so glad to watch the show again on CBS because I was forced to stop watching it as opposed to gradually growing out of it.

[Luckyday]

Not even close.

I honestly think it can if this franchise just allowed itself to have more post shredder material that is telling a story rather then this one shot fragmented feel of the guest book era or keep remaking the same thing over and over again.

[Leo656]

The biggest thing holding it back is simply that it's pigeonholed as a "Kids' Thing". And the people in charge of it have no real interest in letting it grow beyond that. Sure, they get loose with the comics once in a great while, but when it comes to toys, TV shows, and movies, it's Kiddie Town all the way. And that's the stuff the mainstream sees. Figuratively nobody reads comic books.

Batman didn't become a cultural institution until stuff like DKR and the 1989 movie happened. The movie was what really nailed it (because again, the impact of a movie is much greater than that of a comic book). Before the film, in spite of stuff like DKR and Robin being killed in the comic books, the Batman character was still thought of as a kiddie cartoon by most people. That film is what solidified in peoples' minds that it could also be something adults could take seriously and enjoy.

TMNT almost had that with their own movie around the same time, BUT it still had some of the lingering camp elements from the cartoon show attached to it, and since then nobody has ever even really tried to do a "grown-up" version of TMNT. For it to have the same effect as the Batman '89 movie did for that character, a TMNT movie would have to by this point be in the vein of "Batman Begins". In other words, NO humor at all, the characters and premise being taken absolutely seriously and the entire thing treated like "a real movie" and not a way to sell toys.

Until that happens, there's NO chance of TMNT growing out of the "Kiddie Ghetto". And likewise, its chances of being a true "evergreen" property are pretty slim.

It probably won't ever happen, due to people's overwhelming insistence that the entire premise is too ridiculous and therefore TMNT belongs strictly in "funny animal" territory. There's a much bigger uphill battle to fight than something like Batman had.