10 Ways To Make Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2 Not Suck

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Originally Posted by pennydreadful

Once more unto the breach, dear friends...

Puke, I appreciate that you like the movie. That's fine. I'm not faulting anyone who likes it. But it's unfair to suggest that because you liked the movie, nobody else should have a problem with it.

Now, keeping in mind that this is just a movie - let's see if we can have a calm discussion regarding a point you raised yesterday.

For the hundredth time, I am not defending the movie. I'm really just voicing my displeasure with how rabid the people who DON'T like the movie are. However, I do have some counter points to your "plot holes":

Now, according to Macmillan Dictionary, "A plot hole, or plothole is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that creates a paradox in the story that cannot be reconciled with any explanation. These include such things as illogical or impossible events, and statements or events that contradict earlier events in the storyline."
Citation: http://www.macmillandictionary.com/b.../plothole.html

Yourdictionary.com defines a plothole as "A gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot, or constitutes a blatant omission of relevant information regarding the plot."

I mention this only to avoid an argument about what errors in the movie constitute a plothole or inconsistency.

So - onto a few plotholes/inconsistencies in the movie, just off the top of my head:

- Shredder is The Bad Guy but doesn't kill Splinter or Raph.

He punches Splinter in the chest with spiked knuckles or gloves whatever you want to call it, then they throw a bomb into the lair. Yeah we could have had him slowly murder Splinter but would they allow that for PG-13? He defeated Raphael, but before that he says "The 4th cage is for you Raphael" because they want to get his blood. With your statement, Shredder should have just gone up and murdered all the turtles.

- Shredder and Sachs are after the mutagen that's in Splinter and the Turtles, but they don't capture Splinter or Raph, despite the fact that Splinter and Raph are both full of valuable mutagen-blood.

He tries to kill Splinter, and he is told Raphael is dead. Raphael smashes a wall into some foot soldiers, and the ceiling falls on him.

- Raph's shell is cracked, preventing him from going to help Leo during the truck/snow scene. Then five seconds later he's slamming into a humvee with his shell, thanks to the miracle of duct tape.

Congratulations, we have a definite plot hole!

- The Turtles are bulletproof but are vulnerable to tranquilizer darts when the plot demands. While one could argue that the bullets were hitting them in the shell/plastron and the tranq darts were hitting them in arms/legs, the argument then becomes: if the Foot are able to hit them in the arm/leg with a tranq gun, why not with an assault rifle?

Bulletproof and knife proof are two different things. You can still cut through Kevlar because they absorb the bullet, they don't deflect the bullet. In this case their skin is bullet proof, but I'm speaking on how bullet proof vests work, the bullet is caught in the vest, a knife, or needle is formed much differently than a bullet so they could conceivably cut through something that's bullet proof. In the movie the bullets absorb into Raphael and he "bounces" them off, I have been on record saying I do not like this, but it's not a plot hole. They have never established the bullets can't bounce off them. But in the previous statement, it is established Raph is too injured to help Leo, but he's ok to be launched into a Hummer.

- April gets fired from her job as a reporter because nobody believes her story about the Turtles... yet the whole time she has photos of them on her phone. And as this took place at a time in the story when she had not befriended the Turtles yet, it made no sense for her to not show her boss the proof that the Turtles existed.

She has one blurry photo. She had a lot prepared to show her boss, but the actual photo she ends up showing Sacks is 4 blurry blobs. You could either say she wasn't given the opportunity to show her boss, or it wasn't solid enough proof. Sacks believes it because she tells him it's his test turtles.

- Inconsistencies with the Turtles' strength. One minute they're superhumanly strong enough to send a metal shipping crates flying. The next they have trouble lifting a gate. Another minute one can jump literally jump through the metal roof of a van, but 30 seconds later he can't punch through a slab of glass. Another minute they can obliterate a Humvee by jumping at it, but can't even budge a guy in a metal suit of armor... because reasons.

I believe the shipping crate is launched using Donnie's spring loaded staff, but wasn't shown in the movie, but in the trailers it's shown. The Turtles are not in a slab of glass. I'm sure they are in some thick form of Plexiglass or something like that. Raph busts through the side of a van, which is not thick metal. He also runs into the glass one time before Shredder pulls his attention away. It's not like he tried for hours and couldn't do it.

Raph doesn't jump at the hummer, he has been shooting down a mountain, and is launched into the hummer. And he actually kicks Shredder right off the roof at the end.

If you really want to go more in-depth, there are a few sites that discuss other errors in the film in more detail:
http://movieplotholes.com/teenage-mu...a-turtles.html
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1291150/goofs
http://100thingsilearned.com/view/1749/

Now again - if those things don't bother you, that's fine. But saying that there were no plot holes or inconsistencies simply isn't true.



I think he's confusing you with me - I'm the Next Mutation fan, dude.

I never said there are none, if you look something from a few posts ago, I listed a bunch of things I didn't like. This movie is not as bad as everyone is making it out to be. It's almost like the people who hate it so much are taking it personally. It's not the movie I would have made, or the movie I wanted, but for what I was given, I enjoyed it, and I've rewatched it a bunch of times, and still enjoy it. I prefer the 1990 movie, and the Nick cartoon over all else.

[pennydreadful]

Well, that response was... pretty much what I expected.

Look, Puke - I could rebutt each one of your points... but it'd really just be devolving the conversation into semantics, and frankly I don't see the point.

You specifically said:

I'm sorry but this is just a ridiculous statement. The movie is so basic there isn't even enough time to jar you out of the narrative. If you want to say the story was too basic, that's one thing, but gaping plot holes, and inconsistencies? Inconsistencies to what? Other TMNT stories? I would love to know what you think is a plot hole. If you say Splinter learning martial arts from a book is a plot hole, don't even bother replying, that's not a plot hole.

A logical person can infer from that statement that you didn't believe there were any plot holes. Listing things you dislike about a movie is not the same thing.

You asked for plot holes and inconsistencies - I pointed 'em out. If you don't consider some of them to be plot holes, that's fine. I linked to three other sites which mentioned several of the plot holes I did, so for all intents and purposes, it's not unfair to say that the things I mentioned are considered by people other than myself to in fact, be plot holes. We'll leave it at that.

I'm not really sure why you've taken it upon yourself to defend the movie against Internet Haters. You're... not defending it, but you're slamming other people for not liking it - dismissing every criticism they bring up as "whining". I just don't understand what you're trying to accomplish other than fighting for the sake of fighting. People have the right to dislike something and discuss why they don't like it. That's what the board is for.

Calling people "whiners" or "haters" or "crybabies" for disliking the movie adds about as much value to the conversation as referring to people who did like the movie as "dickriders" or "Baytards". And that's the kind of thing that gets conversations heated.

What I find frustrating about engaging in discussion with you regarding the topic of the movie is that every time someone proves you wrong in this thread, you then jump track and go onto something else. As I said, you seem to be arguing for the sake of it - like you're here to punish people for saying negative things about the movie on the internet. You jack-knife from argument to argument, changing direction erratically like a shoal of Argument Fish being followed by a Logic Shark. Sure, you're going to tire people out that way - but it still won't make people stop talking about disliking the movie.

[Powder]

Penny nailed it. & what is that gif supposed to convey as a "counter point"? A threat of violence?

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I've honestly tried to avoid the back-and-forth because most of it is TL;DR, but this sentence leaped out at me and I had to laugh...

Originally Posted by pennydreadful

You jack-knife from argument to argument, changing direction erratically like a shoal of Argument Fish being followed by a Logic Shark.

[pennydreadful]

The wily Logic Shark is an elusive beastie rarely found in these waters.

[TrickOrTreater]

I'm really just voicing my displeasure with how rabid the people who DON'T like the movie are.

Praise He who will show us the error of our ways.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Originally Posted by pennydreadful

Well, that response was... pretty much what I expected.

Look, Puke - I could rebutt each one of your points... but it'd really just be devolving the conversation into semantics, and frankly I don't see the point.

You specifically said:


A logical person can infer from that statement that you didn't believe there were any plot holes. Listing things you dislike about a movie is not the same thing.

You asked for plot holes and inconsistencies - I pointed 'em out. If you don't consider some of them to be plot holes, that's fine. I linked to three other sites which mentioned several of the plot holes I did, so for all intents and purposes, it's not unfair to say that the things I mentioned are considered by people other than myself to in fact, be plot holes. We'll leave it at that.

I'm not really sure why you've taken it upon yourself to defend the movie against Internet Haters. You're... not defending it, but you're slamming other people for not liking it - dismissing every criticism they bring up as "whining". I just don't understand what you're trying to accomplish other than fighting for the sake of fighting. People have the right to dislike something and discuss why they don't like it. That's what the board is for.

Calling people "whiners" or "haters" or "crybabies" for disliking the movie adds about as much value to the conversation as referring to people who did like the movie as "dickriders" or "Baytards". And that's the kind of thing that gets conversations heated.

What I find frustrating about engaging in discussion with you regarding the topic of the movie is that every time someone proves you wrong in this thread, you then jump track and go onto something else. As I said, you seem to be arguing for the sake of it - like you're here to punish people for saying negative things about the movie on the internet. You jack-knife from argument to argument, changing direction erratically like a shoal of Argument Fish being followed by a Logic Shark. Sure, you're going to tire people out that way - but it still won't make people stop talking about disliking the movie.

You said "gaping plot holes and inconsistencies" and offered no examples. I wanted to know such "gaping" plot holes. That description leads one to believe the plot hole is so big the movie makes no sense. You provided a list of things, and only one was credible. I looked at the links you provided, there were no plotholes, maybe some errors, and continuity errors, which are in EVERY movie. The very best movies have mistakes in them.

I never said there were no plot holes or inconsistencies. Never. I also stay with the same opinions, I am not changing directions at all. I have been accused of repeating myself too much a few pages back. I have to keep repeating myself because I keep being told "you defend the movie against people who hate it" which is not what I'm doing for the 199th time. I am not going to change your mind, the same way you are not going to change someone's mind who likes it. If someone has proven me wrong or called me out on something, like when I said "who cares" I've owned up to it. If someone presents me with a "gaping plot hole" then I'll say yeah sure that's a gaping plot hole. To say that I am proven wrong (which has not happened because how do you prove an opinion wrong?) and change directions is a lie. If you offer an even semi intelligent response to something I've said, I have no problem replying, and it's my right to reply.

Here are the thoughts I've expressed in this thread:

1990's Splinter learning martial arts in a cage as a normal rat by simply watching is no better than 2014's Splinter being inspired to learn martial arts from an instruction manual.

I've stated that both the 1990 movie origin, and 2014 origins are dumb.

I've posted a list of things I hated about the 2014 movie.

I've expressed my fascination with the same group of people who infiltrate threads about the sequel with hatred for the 2014 movie.

I've expressed my dislike of those kind of posts.

I've rebutted all but one "gaping plotholes" because one of them was a continuity error.

I also do not attack or call anyone names. Unlike TrickOrTreater who antagonizes anyone who does not share the same view point as him, by attempting to be insulting, also while offering absolutely nothing to the thread.

There is something odd about people who cannot stop talking about things they hate. It's like people who follow celebrities on twitter only to tweet hatred at them. I just do not understand it.

[TrickOrTreater]

There is something odd about people who cannot stop talking about things they hate.

Mmmm delicious irony.

[Jester]

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Originally Posted by TrickOrTreater

Mmmm delicious irony.

It's not irony. I'm not showing up in a thread, voicing my displeasure despite the topic being about something else. My "reason for arguing" has been asked and I've voiced my displeasure in this thread many times because I keep being told that I'm defending the movie. Which I am not doing.

Let me know when I show up in a thread of lets say, fan art, and start telling everyone why I dislike The Next Mutation, and you'll get a full apology from me.

[pennydreadful]

He has an amazing ability to respond to what people have said without actually comprehending what was said, doesn't he?

Taking shots at the intelligence of those who disagree with you notwithstanding, Puke - I ask again: what are you trying to accomplish? To save people from the folly of having an opinion on the internet?

You have a right to an opinion - so do we. We're expressing it. The thing is, we're talking about things we dislike about the movie. You've shown up to the party because you don't like people talking about things they don't like, and you're using the movie as a source of argument.

You're hellbent on being right so you can justify your crusade as the Opinion Police - and it doesn't matter what other people say to you, or how many citations they include in their arguments... because it's not the reasoning that's being used which is flawed. It's your attitude.

Sadly, I sense a mod clean-up pending, which I suppose was inevitable really. god forbid anybody have a calm, lucid discussion about this movie.

[TrickOrTreater]

Originally Posted by Purse Grabbin Puke

It's not irony. I'm not showing up in a thread, voicing my displeasure despite the topic being about something else.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Originally Posted by pennydreadful

He has an amazing ability to respond to what people have said without actually comprehending what was said, doesn't he?

Taking shots at the intelligence of those who disagree with you notwithstanding, Puke - I ask again: what are you trying to accomplish? To save people from the folly of having an opinion on the internet?

You have a right to an opinion - so do we. We're expressing it. The thing is, we're talking about things we dislike about the movie. You've shown up to the party because you don't like people talking about things they don't like, and you're using the movie as a source of argument.

You're hellbent on being right so you can justify your crusade as the Opinion Police - and it doesn't matter what other people say to you, or how many citations they include in their arguments... because it's not the reasoning that's being used which is flawed. It's your attitude.

Sadly, I sense a mod clean-up pending, which I suppose was inevitable really. god forbid anybody have a calm, lucid discussion about this movie.

Talk about not being able to comprehend...I am not being hell bent on being right. If you say something I disagree on, I'll have a discussion with you, but I'm not trying to say I'm right, you're right or anyone else is right. Your opinion is yours you own it. If you want to debate facts like what is a plot hole, let's debate that.

I'm not trying to accomplish anything, I'm having a discussion. I've stated this literally 20 times now, I do not care if you like or don't like the movie. But here is a simple example of a typical thread in this section.

Topic - Who should play Casey Jones
Person A - CM Punk
Person B - Chris Evans
Person C - This movie sucks, the turtles are 8 ft tall so Casey Jones will be roided out and have to be cgi, and Bay is the devil, and the plot sucks and there are gaping plot holes, and Bay just wanted to make money while purposefully ruining TMNT.

Person C is who I have a problem with. There are about 8 Person C's who post in this section, and I have the right to call them out on it if I want.

This particular thread is about how to make the sequel better than the original, so people who disliked the movie should be posting here, they should voice their displeasure with the movie. Let's have a discussion about that, and offer different ideas and takes on what the sequel should be. But let's keep that in these types of threads, not threads for the official movie gifs.


TrickOrTreater - It's very easy to take things out of context. You once again offer nothing of value.

[IndigoErth]

Well... to be fair Person A, B, and D (yes I'm adding one) have the right, and I would hope the ability, to ignore C's statement and carry on with the/a topic discussion. If D comes along and decides to make C's statement into a discussion (that more than likely will turn into an argument) then C and D are no better than each other really under that thread topic.

[TrickOrTreater]

It's very easy to take things out of context.

It's equally ridiculous and hilarious in context as out.

[Redeemer]

Originally Posted by Jester

http://www.underthegunreview.net/wp-...cra2o1_500.gif

lol exactly!!!!!!!

[pennydreadful]

I had actually typed a longer response to this but y'know what? I'm done with it for the day - this has grown tiresomely repetitive and frankly, it isn't very entertaining. So the Logic Shark and I are gonna take a break and grab a slice.



The last contribution I'm making for now is this:

Originally Posted by Purse Grabbin Puke

Person C - This movie sucks, the turtles are 8 ft tall so Casey Jones will be roided out and have to be cgi, and Bay is the devil, and the plot sucks and there are gaping plot holes, and Bay just wanted to make money while purposefully ruining TMNT.

Person C is who I have a problem with. There are about 8 Person C's who post in this section, and I have the right to call them out on it if I want.

It's up to the mods to deal with Person C - not you. Report their comments, or put them on ignore, and move on. All you are doing is creating arguments.

[Panda_Kahn_fan]

Wow this thread has grown sine I last posted!

Well, I agree with points on both sides, and disagree with points on both sides. But as to my earlier comments, I still love the IDW and Nick origins, and still despise the Mirage and 2kids origin. But in either case, the 'learning from a book' angle was a poor choice for this movie.

[Panda_Kahn_fan]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

I'm beginning to think you don't actually get TMNT. This argument is ridiculous.

That is EXACTLY what they were doing. IT WAS A PARODY!!!!!!

Wow. If you're not in on that joke, I wonder what other aspects of TMNT are lost on you.

I 'get' that it started as a parody, I also 'get' that many fans, including many on here, don't see it that away, and want it to be something more than what it started as. I like IDW and Nick because they moved away from the Daredevil elements of the origin, kept what was important (the fact it was an accident with the ooze), and worked the Hamato Yoshi is Splinter angle into the story. It's two origins that stand on thier own.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by Panda_Kahn_fan

I 'get' that it started as a parody, I also 'get' that many fans, including many on here, don't see it that away, and want it to be something more than what it started as. I like IDW and Nick because they moved away from the Daredevil elements of the origin, kept what was important (the fact it was an accident with the ooze), and worked the Hamato Yoshi is Splinter angle into the story. It's two origins that stand on thier own.

That's great. I prefer the Mirage origin, and think that reincarnation is a terribly overused plot device that's both cliche and boring. Candy Kappa made the point pages ago, that it has many problems of it's own.

But this is what I meant, also pages ago, that everyone has a different part of TMNT that they consider sacrosanct, and with so many versions branching from the original, there's plenty of room to disagree.

Also, Puke, you're as much a person C as anyone here. I may be caterwauling against the abomination they call a movie, but you're, what? Policing my caterwauling? Seriously? Why?