William Fichtner confirms Eric Sacks was Shredder originally until reshoots

[Candy Kappa]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

That just means he doesn't remember life as a normal rat, you know, like how the turtles don't remember their thrilling adventures crawling around in a glass bowl in a pet shop.

Probably, but he is an adult rat, so he could have had some time before the lab experiments, the turtles looks very juvenile.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Candy Kappa

Probably, but he is an adult rat, so he could have had some time before the lab experiments, the turtles looks very juvenile.

True, but unless the sequel decides to throw in the reincarnation monkey wrench, anything past him just not remembering his life as a normal rat is kinda reaching.

[Candy Kappa]

Yeah, and completely unnecessary with the direction they have chosen to do.

Splinter and the Turtles are at odds with Shredder just because. That's what they have been in previous versions and PD don't want to make a story more then "Shredder bad, Turtles good"

[TheSkeletonMan939]

Originally Posted by Cipher

I don't know what this means. A good movie would be a good TMNT movie.

Not necessarily. Iron Man 3 was a bad Iron Man movie, but it had pretty neat action sequences and an intelligent storyline in general.

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by TheSkeletonMan939

Not necessarily. Iron Man 3 was a bad Iron Man movie, but it had pretty neat action sequences and an intelligent storyline in general.

Iron Man 3 is a bad movie.

If it had been a good movie, it would have been a good Iron Man movie.

I have no idea what a "good movie but a bad Ninja Turtles movie" would look like, or vice versa. I don't think such a thing can exist except from the most backwardly prioritized, fan-wankiest perspective.

[The Boston Ninja Turtle]

Originally Posted by Panda_Kahn_fan

There's only one point I'm going to make, playing devil's advocate here on the whole 'left out the yoshi/saki backstory... From what Liebsmen said, it was too complicated to put in this particular movie.

Here is the one problem with that train of thought...Letting them get away with saying.."It was to hard this time" doesnt stop them from saying "its stil lto hard but maybe next time"

these guys at PD dont need defending, they just dont care..this franchise is nothing more that a way to "Make the dolla bill yall"

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by The Boston Ninja Turtle

Here is the one problem with that train of thought...Letting them get away with saying.."It was to hard this time" doesnt stop them from saying "its stil lto hard but maybe next time"

these guys at PD dont need defending, they just dont care..this franchise is nothing more that a way to "Make the dolla bill yall"

I think it's also fair to call bullsh*t on that, since that exact scenario took no more than a few minutes to be presented perfectly satisfactorily in the 1990 film, and no more than two pages of the first comic. It's also built on easily recognizable ninja/martial arts fiction tropes as far as audience digestion.

They just didn't want to go that route. Which would also be totally okay, except they didn't even commit to their own alternate approach. So instead we got the weird, unexplainable mish-mash we did.

[Raphael232]

it was a terrible choice for that group to make a Ninja Turtles movie to begin with. Other people should be handling the next movie and THE NEXT Reboot. People that actually know about the world and stay true to the story. I still cant get over the fact that they were so huge.

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by Panda_Kahn_fan

There's only one point I'm going to make, playing devil's advocate here on the whole 'left out the yoshi/saki backstory... From what Liebsmen said, it was too complicated to put in this particular movie. He never said he wouldn't address it at a later time. As an example I point to the 4 kids series, when splinter tells April (and the new generation of kids watching the show) their origin, he omits the shredder/yoshi part altogether, and it's not touched upon at all until much later in the season. Likewise, the nick cartoon left it out of the first episode, as well. Making it a secondary part of the plot in the second episode. Isn't it even slightly possible the book part was a half, truth, and the Saki/Yoshi connection might not come up in part 2. I know that wasn't originally the plan, but they changed shredder, so...

It all comes down to one pronoun and to be honest we were burned so many times with promises and this movie's gaggle of defenders who were convinced that we'd be getting Yoshi and martial arts and that Saki was there from the get-go etc to put my faith in Leibesman's wonky wording.

True other versions haven't given the full origin all in one go. Even the 1990 movie split it in two with Splinter explaining the mutation aspect to April and then the Saki rivalry to Danny later on in the film.

I just don't see it here. If we weren't going to get a full origin in a movie that all about their origin then I don't hold out any hope in a sequel which has to set up Bebop and Rocksteady, possibly Casey Jones as so on. It's not like there wasn't amply room in the story given they wasted 20 minutes on April's story.

Also I think if they were leaving the door open then they wouldn't have given an alternate origin for their martial arts abilities and plays it mysteriously. It already strains credibility that Splinter happens upon a book on ninjitsu when his enemies will be "ninjas" even morso if in the sequel he has some tie to Hamato Yoshi - another ninja. I'd lovee for them to make the original origin work but I just don't see them doing that unless they establish out Splinter was lying about finding a book which I don't think they'll do.

Either that or just retcon the origin - heck retcon the entire of the movie. Would anyone really care? I mean the majority of the people who liked the 2014 movie claim they did so for little other reason other than it's a TMNT movie. If that's their sole criteria for enjoying it then they'd support any decision a sequel made even if it's disregarding the original.

[Panda_Kahn_fan]

Oh, and just to be clear, I'm not a bay or movie defender. the movie was so-so, and they could have done much better. aI was just saying what COULD work at thi point, even though I know they'd never do it.

[Zulithe]

The "better" movie would to have been not to have an Eric Sacks at all, since him not being Shredder makes him totally superfluous and time that could have been used to develop the TRUE Shredder character. But, it's still admirable that they tried to fix it in reshoots. Even though the fixes they patched in were nowhere near what was required to make the film what it deserved to be.

Since we are likely getting a TMNT2, they do have a chance to clean things up a bit more. Not that I have a lot of faith that they can do it. Keeping expectations low is the key for me.

I've long accepted that what they were going for just wasn't for me. I'll still watch them and still hope for a few cool sequences or character moments that ring true for me. I'll cherry pick those best bits and try to appreciate them.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Originally Posted by Panda_Kahn_fan

There's only one point I'm going to make, playing devil's advocate here on the whole 'left out the yoshi/saki backstory... From what Liebsmen said, it was too complicated to put in this particular movie. He never said he wouldn't address it at a later time. As an example I point to the 4 kids series, when splinter tells April (and the new generation of kids watching the show) their origin, he omits the shredder/yoshi part altogether, and it's not touched upon at all until much later in the season. Likewise, the nick cartoon left it out of the first episode, as well. Making it a secondary part of the plot in the second episode. Isn't it even slightly possible the book part was a half, truth, and the Saki/Yoshi connection might not come up in part 2. I know that wasn't originally the plan, but they changed shredder, so...

Well since Liebsmen is out of the picture, is there a possibility that they will retell/retcon the origin story in the sequel even if it might risk confusing the general audience who saw the first one?

[Coola Yagami]

Honestly if I see Sachs in the trailer for the sequel I'm face palming and already declaring this a failure. He has no role in a tmnt movie and he has even less of a reason to return in the sequel than he did even being in it in the first place.

[TrickOrTreater]

Originally Posted by LeotheLateBloomer

Well since Liebsmen is out of the picture, is there a possibility that they will retell/retcon the origin story in the sequel even if it might risk confusing the general audience who saw the first one?

Of course it's possible.

Not probable though.

They don't care enough to do that.

[NinjaPug]

Originally Posted by LeotheLateBloomer

Well since Liebsmen is out of the picture, is there a possibility that they will retell/retcon the origin story in the sequel even if it might risk confusing the general audience who saw the first one?

Liebesman wasn't the problem with the origin (lack thereof) story in the movie. It's the people still attached to the property (Nemec, Applebaum, Fuller, Form) that caused the origin problem.

[TurtleTitan97]

Originally Posted by NinjaPug

Liebesman wasn't the problem with the origin (lack thereof) story in the movie. It's the people still attached to the property (Nemec, Applebaum, Fuller, Form) that caused the origin problem.

^ This. So much this.

[IndigoErth]

Yeah, I imagine you'd have to have new writers, producers, and a company that all agree it needs a do-over. Doubtful...

[BubblyShell22]

Originally Posted by Panda_Kahn_fan

There's only one point I'm going to make, playing devil's advocate here on the whole 'left out the yoshi/saki backstory... From what Liebsmen said, it was too complicated to put in this particular movie. He never said he wouldn't address it at a later time. As an example I point to the 4 kids series, when splinter tells April (and the new generation of kids watching the show) their origin, he omits the shredder/yoshi part altogether, and it's not touched upon at all until much later in the season. Likewise, the nick cartoon left it out of the first episode, as well. Making it a secondary part of the plot in the second episode. Isn't it even slightly possible the book part was a half, truth, and the Saki/Yoshi connection might not come up in part 2. I know that wasn't originally the plan, but they changed shredder, so...

No, the Nick cartoon did address it in the first episode where Splinter tells Leo that he lost his wife and Miwa in the fire due to Shredder. Then he tells more when he talks to Raph in "Turtle Temper" and how the rivalry actually began.

[Panda_Kahn_fan]

Originally Posted by BubblyShell22

No, the Nick cartoon did address it in the first episode where Splinter tells Leo that he lost his wife and Miwa in the fire due to Shredder. Then he tells more when he talks to Raph in "Turtle Temper" and how the rivalry actually began.

No, he didn't. Remeber, the first ep was a two-parter. Like I said in my first post, he brought up the Saki connection in episode 2, not episode one.

[The Boston Ninja Turtle]

Originally Posted by Panda_Kahn_fan

No, he didn't. Remeber, the first ep was a two-parter. Like I said in my first post, he brought up the Saki connection in episode 2, not episode one.

eh...techincality id say thats stretching it...while yes the first ep is a "Two-parter" it is advertised and even sold as an hour long pilot