What would you do with a reboot, with a catch...

[Warboss74]

Originally Posted by Purse Grabbin Puke

So this isn't a TMNT movie? It's a Splinter movie?

Also that plot is better to spread out in a tv show over a season, there is too much for a movie.

I don't get it when people complain about April being the main protagonist then want he movie to be all about Splinter and Shredder....

It's a more streamlined presentation of a story idea I posed on a previous topic. It is a bit Splinter heavy in the drive of the story, but like many have pointed out is the whole foundation the mythos is built on. The 2014 film does a terrible job of establishing any reason to become ninjas, and why they should care about the outside world. It's the turtles are the good guys and the Shredder is the bad guy, so they got fight each other. There is nothing making us care about their conflict. The closest to that presentation in the MCU is Captain America, but even his views are heavily informed by growing up a weakling being bullied all the time.

As for making it fit in a film, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I just don't think it's worth the time to debate/discuss it with someone who's been on the offensive like you have in this thread.

[The Boston Ninja Turtle]

Very well said war boss ,

It's true no hero/villain combo fight just because they do...even Saturday morning cartoons have a little more meat than that

And you are right Steve Rogers wanted to fight because he hates bullies and wanted to "stand up for the little guy" but at the same time remember he is the product of a time when a very big war was going on...he is a soldier and the son of soldiers

He wanted to make his parents proud

Like you said about the turtles and splinter..that is the underlining thread to...he isn't just a star spangled banner and a shield

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

I just want to be clear, I am not advocating the current origin story, and I'm not condemning a more in depth one. I'm simply saying It doesn't really matter.

[Jester]

Most of what "worked" in this movie, for me was based on my prior knowledge/relationship with the characters. Not sure if this is what PGP is getting at, but you could....probably...do a TMNT movie where the ground work is assumed, and just get into a new story proceeding from what is already known about the characters and their relationships.

Heck, I'd almost say if they re-boot Spider-man and Batman again, do we really need the deaths of Uncle Ben and the Waynes to be seen on screen? (Almost) EVERYONE knows the back story, just get on with the new story....or at least maybe show it in small flash-back snippets.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Yes Jester, The Batman v Superman movie is completely bypassing Batman's origins, and actually the '89 Batman only sprinkled the death of Bruce's parents through out and never really touched on it until Batman Forever.


At this point we are getting a sequel, they can build on the one they created, but to add reincarnation and whatever else some people want is pointless, those same people say the plot isn't clear, so what would the plot look like if they start cramming all your favorite origin stories into the sequel?

[Bry]

Originally Posted by Jester

Most of what "worked" in this movie, for me was based on my prior knowledge/relationship with the characters. Not sure if this is what PGP is getting at, but you could....probably...do a TMNT movie where the ground work is assumed, and just get into a new story proceeding from what is already known about the characters and their relationships.

Heck, I'd almost say if they re-boot Spider-man and Batman again, do we really need the deaths of Uncle Ben and the Waynes to be seen on screen? (Almost) EVERYONE knows the back story, just get on with the new story....or at least maybe show it in small flash-back snippets.

I think it's important to establish or touch on the backstory/motivations of the characters, even if it's very brief. You don't always need to cover the origin again. But even sequels tend to touch on/remind the audience why the characters do what they do, because even if they and their stories are iconic, every story should be able to stand on its own and cover the essential character work. Just do it in a natural way that progresses things forward. A writer can do that in a matter of seconds if they're good.

[Warboss74]

Originally Posted by Jester

Most of what "worked" in this movie, for me was based on my prior knowledge/relationship with the characters. Not sure if this is what PGP is getting at, but you could....probably...do a TMNT movie where the ground work is assumed, and just get into a new story proceeding from what is already known about the characters and their relationships.

Heck, I'd almost say if they re-boot Spider-man and Batman again, do we really need the deaths of Uncle Ben and the Waynes to be seen on screen? (Almost) EVERYONE knows the back story, just get on with the new story....or at least maybe show it in small flash-back snippets.

I don't think any reboot should rely on past knowledge when presenting it's story. At some point they have to address where they came from, how they came to be, or what motivated them to do what they do. It can be little snippets here or there if that's how you want to present it or it could be a full origin story spanning the length of the film. It all depends on the story you wish to tell, but at some point it's got to be brought up.

Originally Posted by Purse Grabbin Puke

Yes Jester, The Batman v Superman movie is completely bypassing Batman's origins, and actually the '89 Batman only sprinkled the death of Bruce's parents through out and never really touched on it until Batman Forever.


At this point we are getting a sequel, they can build on the one they created, but to add reincarnation and whatever else some people want is pointless, those same people say the plot isn't clear, so what would the plot look like if they start cramming all your favorite origin stories into the sequel?

I'd be willing to bet that Batman's origin is touched upon in the film. No one has argued against a flashback telling of the origin, and doing a completely different adventure. It's just going to be one of those questions that comes up when you meet someone new, especially if they're walking talking turtles or vigilantes in spandex.

Unfortunately, we're getting a sequel, but the reincarnation aspect is something people are looking at to clean up the terrible narrative that the first one was. Even people who loved the film are in favor of adding the reincarnation origin with one voice in particular being the absolutely sure that's where they're going. I'd rather flush the turd down the toilet and start fresh, but that's me.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by Jester

Most of what "worked" in this movie, for me was based on my prior knowledge/relationship with the characters. Not sure if this is what PGP is getting at, but you could....probably...do a TMNT movie where the ground work is assumed, and just get into a new story proceeding from what is already known about the characters and their relationships.

Heck, I'd almost say if they re-boot Spider-man and Batman again, do we really need the deaths of Uncle Ben and the Waynes to be seen on screen? (Almost) EVERYONE knows the back story, just get on with the new story....or at least maybe show it in small flash-back snippets.

This makes perfect sense. No question that a new story would be refreshing. It's when they tinker with the old story to fit the new that I take issue. It destroys a little of the history of what you already know, and as someone rightly pointed out jars you out of the narrative. The worst of it for me was MOS recently, or even Transformers, with their arrival to earth as opposed to a revival on earth.

As Leo said, it really is thrilling to watch a cartoon transform into a real world film, in some intangible, wish fulfillment way. The job of a filmmaker in comicbook films is one of translation, not reinvention. It really is a different approach to moviemaking compared to an entirely new concept.

[TrickOrTreater]

Originally Posted by Jester

Most of what "worked" in this movie, for me was based on my prior knowledge/relationship with the characters. Not sure if this is what PGP is getting at, but you could....probably...do a TMNT movie where the ground work is assumed, and just get into a new story proceeding from what is already known about the characters and their relationships.

Heck, I'd almost say if they re-boot Spider-man and Batman again, do we really need the deaths of Uncle Ben and the Waynes to be seen on screen? (Almost) EVERYONE knows the back story, just get on with the new story....or at least maybe show it in small flash-back snippets.

Actually, that's what we're getting at some point in Batman/Superman. They filmed a scene with the Waynes and Bruce coming out of the theater showing The Mark of Zorro.

Either through a flashback or what have you. But yeah, that's happening.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by TrickOrTreater

Actually, that's what we're getting at some point in Batman/Superman. They filmed a scene with the Waynes and Bruce coming out of the theater showing The Mark of Zorro.

Either through a flashback or what have you. But yeah, that's happening.

But that's actually pretty cool. Referencing the proper source, not some half-baked idea for convieniance.

Works for me.

[TrickOrTreater]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

But that's actually pretty cool. Referencing the proper source, not some half-baked idea for convieniance.

Works for me.

Oh I don't mind it. I never mind seeing the origin. And I think Thomas Wayne will actually have a mustache this time!

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Purse Grabbin Puke

I just want to be clear, I am not advocating the current origin story, and I'm not condemning a more in depth one. I'm simply saying It doesn't really matter.

...to you. To most people It Totally Matters. Clearly.

And good job Trick for pointing out that they indeed filmed a flashback scene for BvS involving the Wayne murder, one that for once is comics-accurate (I'll forever argue that you can't simply remove the Zorro influence, as it's 100% of the reason Bruce decided to become a masked vigilante and not Something Else). Although "Begins" did a good job with it, but I'm not personally a fan of the "Bruce is scared of bats" angle, that felt oddly tacked-on.

I was gonna mention that they'd filmed that scene but I was sleepin'. They actually kind of made a big deal out of it in the media a few weeks back.

I'm not totally against stories "joined in progress" but it depends. I'd argue that with TMNT there are already TOO MANY variations on the origin, and what hurts things isn't that they keep retelling it, but rather, that every time they do they tack something else on, diluting the story needlessly and confusing people who don't already know it once they see how many contradictory versions there are.

You gotta remember, most people aren't Us. They don't embrace and scrutinize and analyze Every version of a property. Most People casually watch a show or movie about TMNT or Batman or Superman, and when they see a contradictory version, they go, "Wait, so which one is 'real'? Because I thought it was different?" Most people can only accept one "correct" version of events and you have to take that into account when you're adapting these things for a wider audience.

As I said before, it's entirely why more people don't enjoy comics and super-heroes and stuff like that in general. Too many contradictory series of events. Just because most of us can embrace "It's Just A Different Version", that's not how most people think, at all. Most people hear "reboot" or "retcon" or "reimagining" and they mentally check right the hell out.