Thoughts on the new movie! - Page 12

blueoakleyz · 03-24-2007, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jester

Zarius is right...you say that the TMNT and General animation was good, the environments were "great" but over all the CGI sucked and you hate it. How does that work? You've basically said the only thing you "hate" is the human character designs. The Human CGI is only 1/3 of the movie, how can 1/3 be "overall"?

I'm sorry my sophisticated opinions are too complicated for you.
the movie being CGI means NOTHING is real or actually happened. No one in turtle suits performed actual martial arts moves. No one actually did skateboards. THAT's why it's hard to get into it.

blueoakleyz · 03-24-2007, 10:09 PM

As far as a grade goes, since that's what the poll that I already voted in is about, I'll give it a B-. Pretty good movie but the older ones were better. Who knows how good this movie could have been had it not been CGI.

kerfootw · 03-24-2007, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoakleyz

I'm sorry my sophisticated opinions are too complicated for you.
the movie being CGI means NOTHING is real or actually happened. No one in turtle suits performed actual martial arts moves. No one actually did skateboards. THAT's why it's hard to get into it.

"No one actually did (anything)" WTF?! Hello?! It's a movie just like the old ones! NONE OF THEM ARE REAL! WHAT A DUMBASS!!!

And you call yourself sophisticated?! Bull!

*ZariusTwo* · 03-24-2007, 10:10 PM

Especially since the rooftop scene between Leo and Raph was one of the most reallistic moments in ANY animated CGI movie.

*iris* · 03-24-2007, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Especially since the rooftop scene between Leo and Raph was one of the most reallistic moments in ANY animated CGI movie.

I don't know, Zarius. There were those two raindrops that didn't splash off Raph's cranium in a way that was consistent with their vector gradients. That just ruined the whole scene.

*Mr. Snackpants* · 03-24-2007, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Your point? He did'nt have the resources obviously to track and cage those demons for a while. Immortality does'nt buy you class

Sorry for getting tempered, it's just the character of Winters had a good twist, one of the best in the movie

Putrascent...'shipper means "fans who worship a certain romantic couple implied or established in a television series"

It's just "immortality" is kinda out there. Combined with all the stars aligning...you know. I guess it's just a personal preference.

But I agree Winters is a good character regardless.

*Kunoichi_Haruko* · 03-24-2007, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iris

I don't know, Zarius. There were those two raindrops that didn't splash off Raph's cranium in a way that was consistent with their vector gradients. That just ruined the whole scene.

Okay. That had me rolling for at least 45 seconds.

**Jester** · 03-24-2007, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iris

I don't know, Zarius. There were those two raindrops that didn't splash off Raph's cranium in a way that was consistent with their vector gradients. That just ruined the whole scene.

Iris, are you being a smart ass?

*Kunoichi_Haruko* · 03-24-2007, 10:17 PM

I should've popped her on the wrist, right Jester?

*VaughnMichael* · 03-24-2007, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Your point? He did'nt have the resources obviously to track and cage those demons for a while. Immortality does'nt buy you class

Sorry for getting tempered, it's just the character of Winters had a good twist, one of the best in the movie

Putrascent...'shipper means "fans who worship a certain romantic couple implied or established in a television series"

I agree I liked winters more than anyone in the movie just wish he and the generals had more screen time I mean seriously they could have made 2 movies out of this one lol.
oh ic never heard that before was thinking it had to do with fans who are obsessed with seing humans sleep with mutants or animals or something. Ick!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Especially since the rooftop scene between Leo and Raph was one of the most reallistic moments in ANY animated CGI movie.

EVER! fTW

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jester

Iris, are you being a smart ass?

what you'd want a dumbass?

blueoakleyz · 03-24-2007, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iris

I don't know, Zarius. There were those two raindrops that didn't splash off Raph's cranium in a way that was consistent with their vector gradients. That just ruined the whole scene.

I'm pretty sure the whole humans looking like freaks was a little more disjarring than raindrops.

*ZariusTwo* · 03-24-2007, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoakleyz

I'm pretty sure the whole humans looking like freaks was a little more disjarring than raindrops.

"It looked liked your mom dude"

*ZariusTwo* · 03-24-2007, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Putrescent

I agree I liked winters more than anyone in the movie just wish he and the generals had more screen time I mean seriously they could have made 2 movies out of this one lol.
oh ic never heard that before was thinking it had to do with fans who are obsessed with seing humans sleep with mutants or animals or something. Ick!

Close, the term for that is "Furries"

blueoakleyz · 03-24-2007, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerfootw

"No one actually did (anything)" WTF?! Hello?! It's a movie just like the old ones! NONE OF THEM ARE REAL! WHAT A DUMBASS!!!

And you call yourself sophisticated?! Bull!

My god sometimes it really grates at me when people can't understand what I'm talking about just because they are a tad bit complex.

Listen, in the old movies, there are REAL people doing REAL martial arts/stunts/action. They aren't usually hurting each other but they make the illusion they are. Of course that's what a movie is about, making an illusion. You can SEE with your own eyes people doing the moves, so in your imagination you have no reason to believe it isn't actually happening. In a cartoon, where no one is actually doing anything, it works if you need to move the story along but to showcase martial arts or skateboarding skill, it makes no sense. It's like "Why am I supposed to be impressed by some guys skills with a mouse and a computer??"

*VaughnMichael* · 03-24-2007, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Close, the term for that is "Furries"

I thought those where people who dressed up in the costumes or are those plushies...oh my to many freaks in the club for me lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoakleyz

My god sometimes it really grates at me when people can't understand what I'm talking about just because they are a tad bit complex.

Listen, in the old movies, there are REAL people doing REAL martial arts/stunts/action. They aren't usually hurting each other but they make the illusion they are. Of course that's what a movie is about, making an illusion. You can SEE with your own eyes people doing the moves, so in your imagination you have no reason to believe it isn't actually happening. In a cartoon, where no one is actually doing anything, it works if you need to move the story along but to showcase martial arts or skateboarding skill, it makes no sense. It's like "Why am I supposed to be impressed by some guys skills with a mouse and a computer??"

well you better get used to it man those days are dead and gone!
COMPUTERS ARE THE FUTURE JOIIINE UUUSSS! IT'S BLIIIIIIISSSS

Peanut · 03-24-2007, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoakleyz

Listen, in the old movies, there are REAL people doing REAL martial arts/stunts/action. They aren't usually hurting each other but they make the illusion they are. Of course that's what a movie is about, making an illusion. You can SEE with your own eyes people doing the moves, so in your imagination you have no reason to believe it isn't actually happening. In a cartoon, where no one is actually doing anything, it works if you need to move the story along but to showcase martial arts or skateboarding skill, it makes no sense. It's like "Why am I supposed to be impressed by some guys skills with a mouse and a computer??"

Then why did you ever watch the cartoons, or read the comics? None of that "really" happened now, did it? Same thing.

You're allowed to hate everything that isn't live-action, but that doesn't mean you need to bring this stuff up in every thread. What you're doing now is considered trolling, so I suggest you stop.

*VaughnMichael* · 03-24-2007, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peanut

Then why did you ever watch the cartoons, or read the comics? None of that "really" happened now, did it? Same thing.

You're allowed to hate everything that isn't live-action, but that doesn't mean you need to bring this stuff up in every thread. What you're doing now is considered trolling, so I suggest you stop.

I think it goes on both ends though peanut sure most of us loved the movie but as well all know be seeing the reviews out there not everyones gonna we're just gonna have to except it.

The best way to stop a flame war from happening in the first place is not to go down the same path as the person that started the fire.

kerfootw · 03-24-2007, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueoakleyz

My god sometimes it really grates at me when people can't understand what I'm talking about just because they are a tad bit complex.

Listen, in the old movies, there are REAL people doing REAL martial arts/stunts/action. They aren't usually hurting each other but they make the illusion they are. Of course that's what a movie is about, making an illusion. You can SEE with your own eyes people doing the moves, so in your imagination you have no reason to believe it isn't actually happening. In a cartoon, where no one is actually doing anything, it works if you need to move the story along but to showcase martial arts or skateboarding skill, it makes no sense. It's like "Why am I supposed to be impressed by some guys skills with a mouse and a computer??"

Then why don't you hate the old series?! It's a CARTOON! Nothing real is happening in it and it was made using a computer as well! Jesus Christ!

Ralphmacchio · 03-24-2007, 10:31 PM

This film in life action would cost more money than Titanic. Films go the CGI route because it's not as expensive and you get more bang for your buck. 30 million dollars was the budget. That wouldn't even cover a third of a live action film of this scope.

Peanut · 03-24-2007, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Putrescent

I think it goes on both ends though peanut sure most of us loved the movie but as well all know be seeing the reviews out there not everyones gonna we're just gonna have to except it.

The best way to stop a flame war from happening in the first place is not to go down the same path as the person that started the fire.

Agreed. Which is a point I brought up earlier this week when several people were flaming for some of the bad early reviews. There is no doubt that's it a two-way street, and certainly, he is entitled to his opinion. No one can say otherwise. It is possible to be civil when relating a less-than-popular opinion, though. Which is where he seems to fail. You say your piece and move on, there's no need to drag it into more and more threads, especially when you know it's not going to do anything but incite flames.

View Poll Results: Did you enjoy TMNT?
A+ this was an awesome movie	87	41.63%
A It was really good	64	30.62%
B pretty good movie	43	20.57%
C eh it is ok but I like the older ones better	8	3.83%
D Disapointing I didn't really think it was all good	3	1.44%
E Terrible. Disgusting. worst movie of 2007	3	1.44%
I am not going to see this movie. Don't like CGI or ninja turtles.	1	0.48%
Voters: 209. You may not vote on this poll

03-24-2007, 10:10 PM	#224
ZariusTwo Overlord Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Britain, DINO THUNDER...POWER UP! Posts: 22,366	Especially since the rooftop scene between Leo and Raph was one of the most reallistic moments in ANY animated CGI movie. __________________ Spider-Man: The Rescue Spider-Man: The Galloping Cat Spider-Man: Scarlet Mirror Doctor Who: Child of the Daleks

03-24-2007, 10:17 PM	#229
Kunoichi_Haruko A shell of a good hit! Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Richmond, Va. Posts: 1,685	I should've popped her on the wrist, right Jester? __________________

03-24-2007, 10:09 PM	#222
blueoakleyz Foot Soldier Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 179	As far as a grade goes, since that's what the poll that I already voted in is about, I'll give it a B-. Pretty good movie but the older ones were better. Who knows how good this movie could have been had it not been CGI.

03-24-2007, 10:31 PM	#239
Ralphmacchio Thug Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 83	This film in life action would cost more money than Titanic. Films go the CGI route because it's not as expensive and you get more bang for your buck. 30 million dollars was the budget. That wouldn't even cover a third of a live action film of this scope.