Official TMNT: Out Of The Shadows Review Thread (There Might Be Spoilers)

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by Autbot_Benz

wait for its release on friday when actual reviewers review it like Schomes Knows Chris Stuckman Black Nerd Richard Roeper Jeremy Jahns etc.

and the guys from Collider Movie Talk, They liked the 1st one, so I'm curious what they think of this one.

[jenna]

Originally Posted by Vicky82

One thing I forgot to mention was that the room wasn't even half full probably because it was an early screening. When I looked at the seating charts the next 2 screening they are almost full, only seats that are left are near the front.

Jenna was your room full.

Difficult to say. Yes the room was about three quarters full, at a 10.20am showing. But the room was tiny - it was one of those dinky cinema rooms.

[Vicky82]

If anyone prefers to follow metacritic and not rotten tomatoes. here's the link.

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/teen...inja-turtles-2

[Hero]

My daughter and me were in a room with 5 other people at an early showing this morning. When we got out there were more punters queuing for a later 2D showing.

Nice to see one small group of kids bringing Turtles plushies along with them.

In short. I really enjoyed this movie. It was much better than I expected.

[pdizzle]

Originally Posted by Autbot_Benz

wait for its release on friday when actual reviewers review it like Schomes Knows Chris Stuckman Black Nerd Richard Roeper Jeremy Jahns etc.

Yea. These are the reviews I'm looking forward to, as I think we already knew what the critics sensuous would be. Don't really follow critics but I am interested in actual franchise fans and regular movie goers opinions of movies, whether good or bad.

[TigerClaw]

Here's another video review.

[DioLeo451]

Another review
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNHT-IvwP7w

[Bry]

Another glowing review here.

...

Even a tiny inkling of the absurdity of all such stories could carry a movie like this on a merry path, but there is not a lick of wit to be found here (unless you think spitballs and farts are amusing). Shadows is downright leaden, though it obviously believes there is humor in its loud, chaotic juvenility. It would be an unfair insult to cartoons to call this cartoonish; better to say that it fails to even rise to that level. Simply embracing hoary clichés — the brothers are not only divvied up into the leader, the muscle, the brains, and the goofball, they also argue about how one-dimensional they are — does not constitute comedic commentary. Most tedious of all, though, are the samey-same sci-fi action blockbuster shenanigans that howl for a seemingly endless two hours. Screenwriters Josh Appelbaum and André Nemec — who perpetrated the appallingly bad American Life on Mars TV show — and director Dave Green steal bits of story, visuals, and sometimes even entire sequences from the likes of Ghostbusters and Independence Day, Avengers and The Dark Knight. And not in any amusing or knowing way. Not in any way that is the least bit surprising or unexpected. (The whole wormhole-over-Manhattan thing has been done to death.) It’s all depressingly familiar and conventional.

Bonus points for doing the bare minimum of research (more than the producers?) to understand the importance of the property's satirical origins, and having a much stronger criticism about how this movie completely fails on that level.

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

and the guys from Collider Movie Talk, They liked the 1st one, so I'm curious what they think of this one.

Well...they liked it at the time but certainly a lot of there articles since then have painted the idea that they didn't rate it that highly at all.

It's kinda interesting that while almost all the reviews so far have pointed out it's better than the previous movie some have pointed out that they are scoring it the same. It seems to me people overrated the previous movie for not being as bad as it could be while the same people are overrating the sequel by the same degree for not being as bad as the previous movie.

It's kinda funny when you think about it.

[CyberCubed]

So the general gist of reviews is its a better film than the first movie, but not by much.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by Galactus

Well...they liked it at the time but certainly a lot of there articles since then have painted the idea that they didn't rate it that highly at all.

It's kinda interesting that while almost all the reviews so far have pointed out it's better than the previous movie some have pointed out that they are scoring it the same. It seems to me people overrated the previous movie for not being as bad as it could be while the same people are overrating the sequel by the same degree for not being as bad as the previous movie.

It's kinda funny when you think about it.

Part of that reason is cause this movie has the characters that should've been in the 1st one, so it's getting better ratings cause of it.

[unlundun]

my biggest issue with this, and Michael Bay films in general is just how awkward the tone is, this bizarre glossy, product placement, physics defying, garish, "throw in tv personality/sport/cool car" ******** - jerking from epic string driven orchestral to crappy pop song sound track - the opening sequence with April stealing data from Baxter plays out like some horrible american sitcom, its clunky, sexist as hell and just badly put together and has nothing at all to do with TMNT - TMNT is all about the rise of the footclan, the palpable hatred between Oroku Saki and Splinter, the turtles as vigilantes seeking to end Shredders tyranny. Why did the 90's movie get it so right? Because the humour was grounded and characters developed under street lamps and the dark of the sewers - when a film is endlessly quotable, its the sign of a good script, so 90's movie nostalgia aside, a good film speaks for itself. Everyone remembers the knife in the TV screen as our introduction to The Shredder -or his scene as he greets the punk kids, he is a threat, a dark menace. The Shredder is supposed to be feared. This film is basically just a live action episode of the cartoon, with some horrible Michael bay "Drive cool cars! Support the troops! Support the police!' grossness.

[Jasey Cones]

Originally Posted by Bry

I mean, not to pick on someone who might have struggles with communication... but oof, that review was painful to read.



... wait, what? Is this explained at all, or does he just have the ability to teleport out of nowhere?



Well, the first BayTurtles scored lower than BvS. I'm sure that this movie has lower expectations than there were for Batman v Superman, but that doesn't necessarily mean it'll have a higher score. Movie critics at least try to be (or appear) objective, so I don't see them being too kind here, based on what we're hearing and what it's a sequel to.

Yeah its explained but fairly pointless to the new plot so I like to think its a nod to the first movies problem

[Vicky82]

New Reviews

http://www.capsulecomputers.com.au/2...dows-review-2/

http://kneelbeforeblog.co.uk/movies/...form=hootsuite

https://film.list.co.uk/article/8106...f-the-shadows/

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by Vicky82

New Reviews

http://www.capsulecomputers.com.au/2...dows-review-2/

http://kneelbeforeblog.co.uk/movies/...form=hootsuite

https://film.list.co.uk/article/8106...f-the-shadows/

The 1st review doesn't show anything, on the page it just says Test on it.

Here's a working link, looks like they didn't like it.
http://www.capsulecomputers.com.au/2...-movie-review/

[Hero]

Originally Posted by Autbot_Benz

wait for its release on friday when actual reviewers review it like Schomes Knows Chris Stuckman Black Nerd Richard Roeper Jeremy Jahns etc.

Are you suggesting people in the UK aren't good at reviews?

[Bry]

Originally Posted by Autbot_Benz

wait for its release on friday when actual reviewers review it like Schomes Knows Chris Stuckman Black Nerd Richard Roeper Jeremy Jahns etc.

I'm curious what makes Stuckman, Meadows and Jahns "actual reviewers" over anyone else who's reviewed the movie so far, including professional critics working for major publications? Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed their videos, they've made their share of good points... but they're by a rule fan reviewers, and that means they bring fan biases into their reviews that can colour their objectivity to look at them as movies on their own merits.

And I'm sorry, but fan reviewers have a habit of glossing over actually important things like story structure, plot, character development, directing, etc., and focusing on fan service above all else. That's never the sign of a good review. A good review should always make you think about the gears of the thing, who the characters are, how the story works and what it has to say, not just confirm ones' own bias.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

So the general gist of reviews is its a better film than the first movie, but not by much.

Maybe too early to call it a pattern, but at least a few have said as much, and made a point to note how low that bar is to clear.

They set the bar as low as possible, completely failing to make a decent (or even coherent) movie in 2014... then make a marginal (and shallow) improvement in the sequel, and the fans who want to like it fall over themselves praising them for it, throwing money at it, even spending hours of their own time actively promoting it. Gang... do you ever feel like you're being tricked?

[Vicky82]

Another British review

http://www.heyuguys.com/teenage-muta...hadows-review/

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Originally Posted by Bry

I'm curious what makes Stuckman, Meadows and Jahns "actual reviewers" over anyone else who's reviewed the movie so far, including professional critics working for major publications? Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed their videos, they've made their share of good points... but they're by a rule fan reviewers, and that means they bring fan biases into their reviews that can colour their objectivity to look at them as movies on their own merits.

And I'm sorry, but fan reviewers have a habit of glossing over actually important things like story structure, plot, character development, directing, etc., and focusing on fan service above all else. That's never the sign of a good review. A good review should always make you think about the gears of the thing, who the characters are, how the story works and what it has to say, not just confirm ones' own bias.



Maybe too early to call it a pattern, but at least a few have said as much, and made a point to note how low that bar is to clear.

They set the bar as low as possible, completely failing to make a decent (or even coherent) movie in 2014... then make a marginal (and shallow) improvement in the sequel, and the fans who want to like it fall over themselves praising them for it, throwing money at it, even spending hours of their own time actively promoting it. Gang... do you ever feel like you're being tricked?

Wasn't it Stuckman that say that the old TMNT movies were never good?

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

http://whatculture.com/film-tv/teena...yone-will-hate

Don't worry, everyone, the third movie will be better.

Who wants to bet against me regarding the announcement of Blasphemous TMNT CashGrab 3? I say we hear Platinum Dunes announce the third movie no later than August 1st.