William Fichtner confirms Eric Sacks was Shredder originally until reshoots
 

http://www.movieweb.com/teenage-muta...edder-fichtner

Thank god for that. A white man Shredder was so disgusting it made my blood boil even more than Turtle nostrils.

Shut up about the turtle nostrils. It wouldn't surprise me if you secretly enjoy looking at them when nobody is around.

Bad ideas and incompetence from beginning to end.

I'd like to see Sachs come out as a Kraang. Or a scientist working with them. Bring them out as the origin of the mutagen.

No idea what they were making from Day One. Except a toy commercial.

I don't know which option is worse:

1) The original plan of having Sacks be Shredder

2) Having a generic Asian be Shredder in a movie rewritten to a point that the story makes no sense

Hahahahaha.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Happy Holidays Cubed. Try and leave the house if you get the chance. This is proof of the power of the cybercube.

Where are all the Sachs as Shredder deniers? LOL! funny how bit by bit the lie is revised. in 10 years I'm sure some one will admit that this movie was a bitch to make, because no one had any ****ing idea what it was supposed to be about.

Also this was written on Dec 23, 2014 by B. Alan Orange, so take it with a grain of salt.
check the twitter feed here https://twitter.com/balanorange

More like an evil Utrom!

I hope he's being diplomatic given the final product was less than average (to be kind) just how bad was the movie?

I suppose if we're to take Fichtner at his word this might also put a damper on the movie's aplogists who keep saying that flaws in the movie were down to the changes they made to supposedly appease the fans. That being said I do think he's being diplomatic. I'd speculate some like tne inclusion of a more faithful Shredder to be better some sounded like they were for the worse.

Please NO. It sucks for the actor true, to sign on to play the primary antagonist for a series of movies and then to be essentially demoted but it's no baring on him it was just a mistake to cast him as the Shredder in the first place.

I don't want to see him as Krang or a Kraang or Ch'rell or anything like that. Sack's backstory which to be fair was well thought out doesn't really gel with Krang and it's not like his performance really seemed 'alien'.

Again it's unfair but it's best to just assume Sacks was sent to jail and have Fichtner transferred to another Paramount movie. Then again it's interesting that all these actors seem to talk as if the sequel may not be happening. I realise most of them have been in the business long enough to not take anything for granted (this movie certainly showed why) but they still give the impression it's not as definite as their announcement would lead us to believe. Can we hope?

Huh. So the movie was one big mess even BEFORE it was released.

Just goes to show these guys care more for the TMNT property than any movie producer before it.

How'd you get to that in regards to this interview?

Surely it suggests the exact opposite

This is interesting, But I'm fine with the changes they made through the production, The world just wouldn't accept a white Shredder anyways.

I'm curious on what they will do with Eric Sacks in the sequel. Perhaps he will be the one who perfected the mutagen, and creates Bebop and Rocksteady to take care of the Turtles.

http://www.geeksofdoom.com/GoD/img/2...er-530x296.jpg
"I used to be Shredder, then I took a reshoot to the knee"

You know, if Sacks had been the reincarnation of Shredder, I would have been fine with that as it would have worked better and they could have used the other actor to film the flashback scenes. But sadly, this was not the case, and not only did it ruin the movie to have a separate Shredder but also no Saki/Yoshi rivalry. I wonder if said rivalry was also supposed to be in the film and they scrapped it because they wanted to tell a "better story." Instead they told an awful story.

I'm pretty sure both are equally worst. This movie had the blandest Shredder by far.

Translation: "I'm POed about it too, but I'm not allowed to say that."

Translation: "After being changed from Shredder to some bland evil guy, I had no real desire to be in the movie anymore."

I never even thought about this. I mean, that doesn't exactly help the film crew's morale, does it? The thought that everything they're doing might be scrapped in favor of an entirely new story, since that's what happened the first time?

You being allowed to say things like this is proof that there is no God.

oh hi

http://s7.postimg.org/npdpb8ha3/tmnt1990crew.jpg

But back to the topic at hand: so, like... is there any theory about what went wrong in this production that hasn't been proven true by now?

Recasting the main villain during last-minute reshoots. Holy crap. This is not competent filmmaking. It just isn't.

And even then... what kind of movie is it when can you play musical chairs with the casted, major characters and key plot points so easily? Without it even mattering much? Not a good one, that's for sure.

Movies have reshoots all the time.

:lol: Sums it up great.
Well, some actors. They can't really be blamed for what they were told to do. (Just for bad acting in some case(s)...) Producers on the other hand...

That's not what I'm talking about. Punching up an action scene or altering a few beats here or there is one thing. But I'm talking about changing the role of major character entirely, including recasting and totally changing plot points involving multiple characters, during last-minute reshoots. How often does that happen? And even when it does - how often is the end result not a total mess?

Horsesh*t.

According to Jonathan Liebesman, no. He said it was too difficult and complicated to do.

Worth noting - this would definitely explain why plot points/scenes hinted at in the first trailer in March were completely absent from the released movie. And rumours of extensive reshoots were circulating in March/April too, right? Including speculation that the movie would be delayed, but hitting that release date was more important than getting it done right. And I could be wrong, but didn't the actor who did wind up playing Shredder announce he was in the movie right around that time as well?

There's a reason the final cut of this thing felt like such a rush job, and this seems to explain it.

No offence, but this is a joke right? Because that's definitely not the vibe I got from that interview or anything else said by people involved with this movie.

Is today Opposite Day?

Just goes to show that Platinum Dunes doesn't give a **** about these characters or the TMNT mythology at all.

It happens very often, Sometimes they have reshoots when they do test screenings, If the audience who seen it doesn't like what they saw, They do reshoots to fix them.

Im just going to assume that you're joking.

The amount of rework that was done to this movie is not common at all. Yes, reshoots happen in nearly 100% of all major studio films. What happened with TMNT goes beyond simple reshoots.

Look I am a fan/defender of the 2014 movie and I have to agree what you said is a load of BS. This is the same company that almost did Alien Turtles

Yes, and often reshoots can be very beneficial to a film.

But often it's just removing unnecessary content or changing the ending around. Most reshoots do not entail completely changing the main villain's identity.

The thing that annoys me most is that Bay cited Fox's pregnancy as the need for reshoots, and that she couldn't do all of her action scenes before (she had, like, one, so that was a flimsy excuse in itself).

Again - there's a difference between commonplace reshoots to rework minor scenes, adjust the flow of the story and punch up the action, and ones extensive enough that they change who the main villain is. Those are two very different things. The former is a pretty standard thing; the latter suggests the entire project is a mess that they're desperately trying to salvage.

Bay lied through his teeth about every problem this production ran into, so that's no surprise.

And hell, I don't mind that sort of thing if it's to protect secrets/surprises in the final product, but all of his seemed to be covering for his/his studio's incompetence.

Pretty sure most people know this already, but I still enjoy Sacks. :tlove:

"Mmhmmhmm...let me look at you" (the way he delivered that line cracks me up) :tlol:

"Draw all of their blood, even if it kills them"

I mean... if he treasures the mutant blood so much, why not keep them alive so he can keep extracting blood from them? But I guess he just got carried away being evil like "let's just kill them all and be done with it" lol :lol: :tlol:

In that interview with Michael Bay, He mention that the tone of the movie was wrong, And they had to fix it, It was too serious, I bet Nickelodeon had something to do with the changes, given that they own the property, and Paramount also owns Nickelodeon, They were probably behind the movie being aimed at kids, To meet Nickelodeon's guidelines.

The level the apologists go to defend this movie is pretty astounding.

Even to try to alter the fabric of reality itself.

It all begins and ends with Bay.

Uh...no.

That Michael Bay interview makes it very clear that Michael Bay wanted to lighten the tone up.

Which is what Nickelodeon would want, Even the Nick TMNT series has a light tone.

...which is not at all relevant since it was MICHAEL BAY who wanted to lighten the tone, and Nickelodeon wasn't at all mentioned.

Sure. But it also has backstory involving Hamato Yoshi's murdered wife and stolen daughter, several plotlines involving people struggling with being mutated against their will, and recently showed Leonardo beaten into a coma. And put in the work so that all of those moments had real weight.

Any story can deliver a "light tone" while also delivering compelling drama with real stakes. If the people making it have the talent and/or care enough to put the effort in.