The cgi movie that was turned down

[Kendamu]

Originally Posted by gobo

[sarcasm]Violence at the expense of interesting story-telling, yay![/sarcasm]

Because you can't have violence and good storytelling at the same time, right?[/sarcasam]

[CJStyles]

Dude, I would have love to see the first TMNT comic turned into a movie. And I know it would of kicked the 2007 movie's ass

[gobo]

Originally Posted by Goongasnootch

Because you can't have violence and good storytelling at the same time, right?[/sarcasam]

Just meant that I think that's how DC's 'experiments' with the PG-13 rating have been so far. They'd be more interesting if they weren't so preoccupied with throwing in gore or vulgarity or adult-situations into every scene.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by gobo

Just meant that I think that's how DC's 'experiments' with the PG-13 rating have been so far. They'd be more interesting if they weren't so preoccupied with throwing in gore or vulgarity or adult-situations into every scene.

That's odd. I've seen both New Frontier and Superman: Doomsday (and Batman Begins... that's PG-13)... I don't recall any gore or any vulgarity above your garden variety "hells" or "damns" and not even much of them.

And adult situations... as opposed to what? Children situations? Is that what you would like?

[gobo]

No, I'd prefer they were more intellectually stimulating. I didn't have to think to understand these movies though. So I don't misrepresent my complaint, the PG-13 additives were more often than not gore. If you can't remember those scenes, you must have zoned out. I understand the importance of blood-spatter when Supes is getting his Kryptonian buttocks handed to him, but there's only so much you can put in before making the audience feel that the point of the whole thing is to ride the PG-13 rating 'til the wheels fall off. So, as I've said before, I just don't think DC struck the balance between violence and interesting storytelling well enough for my liking yet. Of course, I'm still giving them the opportunity to impress me with their future projects.

[Drtooth]

I think we learned a lesson today. Sometimes it's just plain best not to know any of this stuff. It drives you crazy when you think about the "what could have beens." Movies are a prime example of this.

Did you know that in Looney Tunes Back in action, the scene where Bugs Bunny knocks over the water tower, Yakko, Wakko, and Dot were supposed to jump out of it?

Did you know Uncle Travelling Matt (from Fraggle Rock) was to have a Cameo in Muppets From Space?

I could go on and on with the "what could have beens" but there are too many to count.

This is very disappointing, and it really seems it would have been better than whatever sequal idea they come up with. I'm gonna go ahead and theorize 4Kids wanted to make damn well sure the franchise was just for kids, with only a couple fan service T-shirts for the 20 + set. Same theory I have about the movie being rated PG, when PG 13 would have worked.

[Dragon Turtle]

Originally Posted by Drtooth

This is very disappointing, and it really seems it would have been better than whatever sequal idea they come up with. I'm gonna go ahead and theorize 4Kids wanted to make damn well sure the franchise was just for kids, with only a couple fan service T-shirts for the 20 + set. Same theory I have about the movie being rated PG, when PG 13 would have worked.

I believe it was Warners Bros more then anyone else who were responsible for the movies PG rating, and I doubt 4Kids had anything to do with the cancellation of the direct-to-dvd project.

[tilallr1]

This is exactly what I think TMNT should have been. A complete reboot of Turtle Movies based on the orginal concept/design from the Mirage comics. Its essentially what the TMNT TV series has been. Without the awesome ninja violence & Red bandanas.

[Drtooth]

Originally Posted by Dragon Turtle

I believe it was Warners Bros more then anyone else who were responsible for the movies PG rating, and I doubt 4Kids had anything to do with the cancellation of the direct-to-dvd project.

Well, since 4 Kids is the licencer, and considering their past history with everything, you can see why I was going that way.

[TheAnimatedSeries]

Superman: Doomsday didn't impress me on any level and I occasionally felt like they were just trying to force badass elements of PG-13 into the mix. The New Frontier has some pacing issues, but its characterization and overall story were great, and the violence was much appreciated. It sounds like the rewrite would have been that kind of film.

[AquaParade]

Damn it! Why'd you have to bump this thread???

I had almost forgotten all the wasted potential.

[Newton Gimmick]

There's little to no "adult" violence in either of those DC movies. Sure, Lex shoots Mercy in the head, but even that is treated quite well. And that's the one scene the audio commentary admits was thrown in just to get some more gore into it.

For the most part, the DC movies are just Bruce Timm doing what he does best... Making awesome DC animated stuff.

Sorry just don't agree with the idea that they've thrown gore or vulgarity or adult-situations into every scene. They've kept the movies with a PG-13 theme the whole time. The stories themselves could be stronger if they were allowed a longer runtime, but I didn't find gratuitous amounts of anything in them except gratuitous amounts of awesomeness.

[Mr._Mutant_Man]

Justice League: New Frontier was really cool IMO, and it has me looking forward to what they'll do with that Batman tie-in this summer.

The Marvel animated movies have been really bad so far, though. I think maybe they need to borrow some ideas from Justice League: New Frontier and try to copy the art style of one of their classic comics. So far all the Marvel animated movies have made me just want to turn the movie off and re-read the comic instead.

[AquaParade]

Ah...Just read issue tmnt #1 the other day and remembered how much were missing out on...I know, I'm a downer. Anyways, does anyone have any guesses they actually think are good on what we might be getting instead?

[Spitfire]

My Dad brought up a great point today. I mentioned that all these Super Hero movies get PG-13 treatment even f'ing Transformers gets a PG-13 treatment why can't turtles. He said, "Well the turtles has been forever placed in the public eye as a kids property because of the old series. This also continues with the new series even if it is more adult."

It's sad but true. They did it right with Transformers, made the PG-13 movie then the series came afterwards, same thing with Spider-man, and Batman too I believe.

Turtles has always been PG in the movie world and it will remain that way. They need to focus on really good character driven plots and they can lure in audiences that way instead. The action angle just isn't going to work with the PG rating.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Spitfire666xXxXx

My Dad brought up a great point today. I mentioned that all these Super Hero movies get PG-13 treatment even f'ing Transformers gets a PG-13 treatment why can't turtles. He said, "Well the turtles has been forever placed in the public eye as a kids property because of the old series. This also continues with the new series even if it is more adult."

It's sad but true. They did it right with Transformers, made the PG-13 movie then the series came afterwards, same thing with Spider-man, and Batman too I believe.

Turtles has always been PG in the movie world and it will remain that way. They need to focus on really good character driven plots and they can lure in audiences that way instead. The action angle just isn't going to work with the PG rating.

Just nonsense. So it's been one way once upon a time, it needs to forever be a slave to that way (to say nothing of the source material existing completely in spite of it)?

Should Batman forever be chained to how it was in the 60s TV show, because that was what was "most aware" in the public consciousness in one particular generation? This train of thought is crazy, without merit, and plain short-sighted.

The way TMNT is different is... OK, we have the Batman 60s TV show and similarly we have the TMNT OS, yes? With Batman (which did begin somewhat grimly in comic books, with Batman shooting criminals dead with a gun and smiling), pretty much the 60s TV show came and went, and that was pretty much the last we saw of campy, silly, light-hearted Batman rubbish (apart from a bit of crap here and there along the way), can we agree? With TMNT, we had the original children's cartoon... and then a semi-serious movie followed by two sequels, NT:TNM, then a kiddy fourth movie, all REINFORCING the things the original children's cartoon rammed down the collective public consciousness.

My point is... with enough time, TMNT can move on, move closer to what it was in its inception in the comics. But with every kiddy incarnation popping up at seemingly every turn, the hope/movement is perpetually set back.

[Spitfire]

Batman is a pretty poor example. The 60's movie came out in 66. Almost 10 years later in 89 they re-birthed it with no current TV series to accompany it. Then in 92 Batman Returns comes out and a TV series to go with it. Batman was well established in it's ways at this point. By 95 when Forever came out PG wasn't what it used to be and the Batman series evolved up and went PG-13. It made sense.

Batman has a huge fan following, they could make a rated R Batman movie and it would sweep up the box offices. However Turtles does not have the same huge following. For one they never had the chance to make the series more serious. The first movie got away with a lot but from there it all went downhill. On top of how extremely kid focused the TV series was. It wasn't like Batman which could cater to an adult audience. Hell I was just watching an episode tonight where they were talking about busting up crack houses, you'd see anything like that in turtles.

Transformers also has a huge following, much larger then turtles, so does Superman, X-men, Spider-man, and just about every comic book hero whose not printed on an independent label. No one knew turtles was based off a comic and there's still people today who don't. Most of the people remember it as a goofy kids series with nothing adult to be seen in it. The series wasn't made to appeal to kids past the age of 12 and that's pushing it. So why should WB take the risk of making a PG-13 movie?

How would they advertise it? "Straight from the pages of the comic to the big screen!" Okay so you and I know the comic was more violent and mature but do the general public know that? No they think the comic was just as goofy as the show.

You gotta keep in mind this message board is the minority here in anything involving the turtles, we love it but the rest of the world doesn't know what we know or share that love we have for it. And turtles may be big here but it's nothing compared to cash cows like Spider-man which can be a summer blockbuster.

[Dragon Turtle]

Originally Posted by Spitfire666xXxXx

My Dad brought up a great point today. I mentioned that all these Super Hero movies get PG-13 treatment even f'ing Transformers gets a PG-13 treatment why can't turtles. He said, "Well the turtles has been forever placed in the public eye as a kids property because of the old series. This also continues with the new series even if it is more adult."

It's sad but true. They did it right with Transformers, made the PG-13 movie then the series came afterwards, same thing with Spider-man, and Batman too I believe.

Transformers has always been portrayed as a kids property both before and after the movie whether it's the three anime series that came before the movie or Transformers: Animated afterwards, all were aimed more toward kids then TMNT 2K3.


Studios were not lining up to produce movies based on either property.

Transformers is a PG-13 movie because, Paramount and Dreamworks were desparate for a summer tent pole movie franchise and decided to take a gamble on Transformer's nostalgia factor. It was also endorsed by Spielberg and being a live action summer movie, it was needed to appeal to more then just the under 13 crowd.

TMNT was PG because Warner Bros was convinced of its viability as a movie franchise due to the popularity of the recent cartoon, Warner Bros never really considered that older fans of the franchise would be interested in a new movie. TMNT was also an animated movie, which do not possess a good track records when it comes to PG-13 releases. And someone (WB, Mirage, or someone else) had a deal with McDonalds which demanded TMNT be PG movie or else no Happy Meal deal.

[ToTheNines]

Let's say TMNT and Transformers had a relativley equal fanbase before 2007 (which they didn't)

1. Transformers was a Spielberg movie, the mastermind behind TMNT was a rookie. Point: Transformers.
2. Transformers had hot young celebrities (Labouf and Fox) which made all of the teenagers want to see it (even girls), so did TMNT (Gellar and Evans) but they were just voices. Point: Transformers.
3. Transformers had WAY more hype and advertising. Point: Transformers.
4. Transformers had great special effects that made people like my dad (who dosen't give a **** about either properties) want to see it, and it had big effin robots fighting, which made little kids **** their pants. Point: Transformers.

Rating wasn't a factor.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Spitfire666xXxXx

Batman is a pretty poor example.

I think it's the most valid example out there, if you kind of put aside the Batman Explosion that later kind of happened in the 90s/now.

The 60's movie came out in 66. Almost 10 years later in 89 they re-birthed it with no current TV series to accompany it. Then in 92 Batman Returns comes out and a TV series to go with it. Batman was well established in it's ways at this point. By 95 when Forever came out PG wasn't what it used to be and the Batman series evolved up and went PG-13. It made sense.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the 60s Batman series being -- for a generation, in popular culture -- the most recognizeable incarnation of Batman.

Batman has a huge fan following,

He does now. Batman was barely relevant in 1989, the comics teetering on cancellation numbers... but enough time had passed since the 60s show had ended that people going, "What a minnit... that's not Batman! Where's the camp and 'Pows' 'Biffs' and 'Zaps' and the red Bat-Phone!" didn't make any difference.

they could make a rated R Batman movie and it would sweep up the box offices.

Maybe, but you made that up.

However Turtles does not have the same huge following.

Neither did Batman, really, when Burton did his movie. My example stands.

For one they never had the chance to make the series more serious.

That's pretty much my point. They've never had a chance. Never even attempted, never once.

A TMNT comic book movie (in the vein of Iron Man, Spider-Man, Batman Begins) is something that deserves, at least, the chance to fail. I say it won't fail, but damn it, it deserves the chance.

The first movie got away with a lot but from there it all went downhill. On top of how extremely kid focused the TV series was.

This is just history that should be learned from. Going forward: TMNT aiming younger and younger while audience getting older = bad.

Though TPTB seem to enjoy that vicious circle. Shooting for the lowest common denominator time and time again, then wondering why things peter out (no pun intended).

It wasn't like Batman which could cater to an adult audience. Hell I was just watching an episode tonight where they were talking about busting up crack houses, you'd see anything like that in turtles.

The TMNT aren't and shouldn't be crime-fighters, so that's not surprising.

Transformers also has a huge following, much larger then turtles,

The Transformers are not comic book characters.

so does Superman, X-men, Spider-man, and just about every comic book hero whose not printed on an independent label.

These followings weren't built overnight. They were earned.

Let TMNT earn a new following, one not confined to toddlers and tweens but the audience it was always intended for in the first place: adults/young adults. The kids will come anyway. The kids whose parents won't let them see a PG-13 movie... ****'em.

No one knew turtles was based off a comic and there's still people today who don't.

That's not the fault of the source material, is it? How long does TMNT as a franchise need to suffer because one day in 1985, 86, Peter Laird and Kevin Eastman said, "All right, Fred Wolf, we'll let you do a children's cartoon based on our comics"?

Most of the people remember it as a goofy kids series with nothing adult to be seen in it. The series wasn't made to appeal to kids past the age of 12 and that's pushing it. So why should WB take the risk of making a PG-13 movie?

Back to my Batman analogy. 1989, the biggest incarnation of Batman in the mass media remained the 1960s TV show. Why would WB take the risk of making a PG-13 Batman movie?

Because enough time had passed, and they had enough balls to take a risk on material they believed in!

How would they advertise it? "Straight from the pages of the comic to the big screen!" Okay so you and I know the comic was more violent and mature but do the general public know that? No they think the comic was just as goofy as the show.

I don't think either you or I majored in marketing (and I think such speculative thinking ought to be left to those who did), but I don't think any marketing campaign for a proper comic book TMNT movie needs to even so much as mention it's "From the comics." But it could.

For a teaser trailer? OK, off the top of my head... just, visceral imagery, the TMNT tearing into a group of Foot, flash-cuts of various gritty scenes, the "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" logo appears and Leo's katana suddenly slices into it (the way the original Vol. 1 logo looks), blood dripping off of it, cue "Summer 2015" or whatever. TV spots could take a similar approach. If you had to have a voiceover, it could be something like, "In Summer 2015, Warner Bros. Pictures and Director so-and-so bring you the original vision of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles," cue the aforementioned stuff.

It doesn't take rocket science, it just takes creativity, some measure of savviness, and balls.

You gotta keep in mind this message board is the minority here in anything involving the turtles, we love it but the rest of the world doesn't know what we know or share that love we have for it.

You're right, of course, but I think you overestimate how many active TMNT fans there really are.

The average TMNT fan (not the kind that go, "I wonder if there's any Ninja Turtles message boards on the net, why don't I find out and join some"), I think, discovers TMNT and outgrows it, to be replaced by another TMNT fan that outgrows it. And it goes on and on until whatever cartoon or toy line is currently out there is no longer accessible to even the fresh kiddy faces... then the whole thing goes back into hibernation for them to repeat it all over again in a few years.

Then there's the handful of cult fans, people like you and I. There's different sects of us, many just young at heart that just miss their childhood and cling to things from it such as it was portrayed then (maybe something in there, psychologically, for some of these fans that scares them about "Growing Up" the TMNT... for this would represent, on some level, them having to "Grow Up" as well) and others, like me, that are just gluttons for punishment that, for some reason, stick around no matter how maligned the TMNT are at large. Perhaps I suffer from battered wife syndrome... deep down, I probably am burning a candle that someday (and it won't be soon) TMNT will get better and have its day.

And turtles may be big here but it's nothing compared to cash cows like Spider-man which can be a summer blockbuster.

There's no reason a TMNT movie couldn't be a summer blockbuster. Well, there's reason now, being last year's movie put a big, fresh coat of Kid Stink™ all over the franchise for at least another 10 years.