New CGI movie

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by FrederikWolferson

It didn't have plot. It's status quo never changed and the characters never developed. They end up same as they started in season 1,just without Splinter.

You can say that for almost any TMNT incarnation outside maybe Mirage. The Turtles all revert back to their archetypes in every series no matter what happens to them.

[AquaParade]

I'm trying to say this without negating valid complaints, but I feel like expectations play a huge role in something like this. I just don't know how much you can expect from a series that needs to "serve as many masters" as TMNT 2k12. It's always a slight miracle when a children's cartoon can truly stand the test of time, like Batman: TAS.

For a show like this, if it can hold my attention for the entire runtime, it's probably doing something right. I never went into this show expecting to be wowed, so I came away impressed with what they were able to come up with and by the bits that are rather reverent of the original concept.

And before you think I'm someone who just accepts anything with a "TMNT" sticker on it, it simply isn't the case.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by FrederikWolferson

It didn't have plot. It's status quo never changed and the characters never developed. They end up same as they started in season 1,just without Splinter.

Yeah man... Um. Basically everything you put forth as a criticism here was the exact opposite of what actually happened on the show.

The seasons were all completely plot driven. They were so much so that the plots informed where the Turtles would be the next season.

The status quo changed from a "street level New York City action show" to an "out in the country mystery show" to a "dimension hopping sci-fi space show" and then came back full circle in the end.

Ending up where they started is a classic visitation to the roots in any storytelling. As for the characters developing? You answered your own question - throughout the show the brothers grew to the point where Splinter was ultimately gone, and although they missed him they evolved to where they didn't need him anymore. They grew autonomous.

LMAO... give me a break man. It's one thing completely if you didn't like the show for personal psychology XYZ, but quite literally everything you've said in the post I quoted is literally, demonstrably 100% wrong. When you do that it wreaks of phony intellectualism, rotten eggs, or just that you are trying to sound informed and never watched the show. I mean it's literally the exact opposite of what you've said here.

Originally Posted by AquaParade

I'm trying to say this without negating valid complaints, but I feel like expectations play a huge role in something like this.

And see, at least this makes sense. I'd be more inviting of a long-term fan simply saying "TMNT '12 didn't give me what I've been looking for out of the franchise for 25 years now - I want a straight up, non-stop ninja show". And something like that would be credible. Not that other phony BS.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by IMJ

I thought TMNT '12 was a home run - maybe not a grand slam, but it was solid. It was a rare example of a significant I.P. shift that still maintained the heart of TMNT very well, and brought a lot of fans back into the fold - myself included.

I will say that I was more forgiving of the show while it was airing, although now in hindsight some of the criticisms here on the forums are somewhat credible - the outer space season season for example. At those times during broadcast I just figured my interest was waning a bit, but in hindsight there may have been a few narrative mis-steps. But that show did everything it was supposed to and there were several moments where you could actually laugh out loud watching it, which although the goal of a lot of animation, almost never actually happens in real life.

TMNT '12 was overall very solid. I'd say that it's biggest weaknesses were some of the character designs, which didn't always meet with my nerd-approval. But c'mon already - that show with it's continuity, the Michelangelo moments, the repetition of Leatherhead pulling on Donatello's nose, the quirkiness of the character traits juxtaposed with the moments of great "ninja coolness" was all executed perfectly.

Some of the criticisms here have merit, sure. But overall that was a great show.

TMNT 12 was pretty good, Except when they create new characters, and then slap the names of classic characters on them, So they are just characters in name only, and nothing like the originals.

Im not really happy with how they treated the Nutrinos and Wingnut and Screwloose, Such wasted opportunities.

[CyberCubed]

Maybe this movie will be canceled now since Seth Rogen is being canceled.

[FrederikWolferson]

2012 version was just wasted potential. Rise is just generic CalArts crap.

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by FrederikWolferson

2012 version was just wasted potential.

They covered what they wanted to do for 5 seasons and 124 episodes.

[sdp]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

They covered what they wanted to do for 5 seasons and 124 episodes.

yes, horror tributes.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

They covered what they wanted to do for 5 seasons and 124 episodes.

124 episodes and the show still got plenty of unresolved cliffhangers, how does that even happen?

[sdp]

Originally Posted by neatoman

124 episodes and the show still got plenty of unresolved cliffhangers, how does that even happen?

what show doesn't end with a bunch of cliffhangers?

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by neatoman

124 episodes and the show still got plenty of unresolved cliffhangers, how does that even happen?

I mean not counting the 20 (?) year time skip in the last 3 eps, everything was resolved. We know April's mother was dead, see see Mutagen Man's container at the bottom of the sea in the future.

Whatever mutants were running loose around the city like Snakeweed/Spiderbitez or whomever don't really matter because there's always random mutants out there and the whole planet becomes mutant world in 5 years time or whatever.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by sdp

what show doesn't end with a bunch of cliffhangers?

Ones that can focus on the main story without intentionally leaving a bunch of open plot threads and/or gets more than enough episodes to reseolve them. If the show had not been so obsessed with introducing new characters and teasing their return, maybe this wouldn't have been the case, but they did tease the return of the Fugitoid and despite having 32 episodes left never touched on that. And then there is just weird horseshit like revealing Dregg was a robot and just ignoring it.

This would have been so easy to fix too:

1. Don't tease the return of characters you have no plans for.
2. Follow up on teasers within two seasons.
3. Make sure side plots are resolved within the season they're introduced.

I get that it could be hard in some cases, Spectacular Spider-Man only got 26 episodes spread out over two seasons, but this show got 124 and should have been able to resolve everything.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

I mean not counting the 20 (?) year time skip in the last 3 eps, everything was resolved. We know April's mother was dead, see see Mutagen Man's container at the bottom of the sea in the future.

Whatever mutants were running loose around the city like Snakeweed/Spiderbitez or whomever don't really matter because there's always random mutants out there and the whole planet becomes mutant world in 5 years time or whatever.

Being told on twitter that April's mom was dead all along and seeing a container without context are not conclusions. One is the writer trying to handwave away a question and the other is ambigious. One sucks because the show itself never gave us an answer and the second one sucks because it's barely an answer that fails to explain anything important.

As for the random mutants running around, you do realise a major population center having an infestation of monsters hiding in the shadows isn't something that can just be ignored, right? That is arguably even worse than the first two because it should have major implications about what's going on.

Lame but proper explainations would have been to show mom's skeleton in a lab, have Don demutate Mutagen Man when Mike made anti-mutagen by accident and say that the EPF scooped up mutants to freeze until they could be demutated. Lame because the cliffhangers and teases might as well not even have been there if they weren't going to tell actual stories building on them, but actual explainations still.

[Zog The Magnificent]

None of these things are cliffhangers. Even Fugitoid is just a sequel hook, but that one did annoy me. But anyways, all of these are just background details that got elaborated on sometimes. They were never subplots. April's mom was never a subplot, and the episode answered it: she's dead. All the actual plot points and character arcs got resolved by the end of the show.

[IMJ]

How do you guys by and large feel about the character design and art direction? I thought TMNT '12 started off great on each; but as the show went on I can't help but feel that there were too many "Large animals" and fewer "mutants" that made for a cool hybrid of "man and animal".

I also didn't think that many of the character models were as attractive as I would have liked for "cool characters". For example, Slash with the exaggerated "pea-head" - I hated that character design. Wasn't a fan of "kid Casey" with the gap in his teeth although that design did, at least, suit the character as presented in the show. Maybe with the exception of Leatherhead, I wasn't a fan of anytime a mutant was simply a regular animal walking upright (Pigeon Pete, for example). Thought that the Rat King was a novel approach - I respect it, but didn't like it.

Thought the main 6 character designs were good, as well as Shredder and the Krangs. I really wouldn't mind watching this show again beginning to end and seeing how I feel about it now. Back when it was release it was anticipated TV for me as a show that drew me back into "something on TV" for the first time in years.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by IMJ

How do you guys by and large feel about the character design and art direction? I thought TMNT '12 started off great on each; but as the show went on I can't help but feel that there were too many "Large animals" and fewer "mutants" that made for a cool hybrid of "man and animal".

I also didn't think that many of the character models were as attractive as I would have liked for "cool characters". For example, Slash with the exaggerated "pea-head" - I hated that character design. Wasn't a fan of "kid Casey" with the gap in his teeth although that design did, at least, suit the character as presented in the show. Maybe with the exception of Leatherhead, I wasn't a fan of anytime a mutant was simply a regular animal walking upright (Pigeon Pete, for example). Thought that the Rat King was a novel approach - I respect it, but didn't like it.

Thought the main 6 character designs were good, as well as Shredder and the Krangs. I really wouldn't mind watching this show again beginning to end and seeing how I feel about it now. Back when it was release it was anticipated TV for me as a show that drew me back into "something on TV" for the first time in years.

I wasn't a fan of the Mona Lisa design, Since they made her a Space Salamander instead of a mutant from Earth.

[newfan]

Originally Posted by IMJ

How do you guys by and large feel about the character design and art direction? I thought TMNT '12 started off great on each; but as the show went on I can't help but feel that there were too many "Large animals" and fewer "mutants" that made for a cool hybrid of "man and animal".

I also didn't think that many of the character models were as attractive as I would have liked for "cool characters". For example, Slash with the exaggerated "pea-head" - I hated that character design. Wasn't a fan of "kid Casey" with the gap in his teeth although that design did, at least, suit the character as presented in the show. Maybe with the exception of Leatherhead, I wasn't a fan of anytime a mutant was simply a regular animal walking upright (Pigeon Pete, for example). Thought that the Rat King was a novel approach - I respect it, but didn't like it.

Thought the main 6 character designs were good, as well as Shredder and the Krangs. I really wouldn't mind watching this show again beginning to end and seeing how I feel about it now. Back when it was release it was anticipated TV for me as a show that drew me back into "something on TV" for the first time in years.

It was mostly just spare/random humans that I didn't care for, found them plain/dull (guessing budget issues?) I'd not really thought too much about the ratios of human and animal in the mutants before, I did like Leatherheads design though. Agreed with Casey, both about the look but also that it went with the characterisation.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by Zog The Magnificent

None of these things are cliffhangers. Even Fugitoid is just a sequel hook, but that one did annoy me. But anyways, all of these are just background details that got elaborated on sometimes. They were never subplots. April's mom was never a subplot, and the episode answered it: she's dead. All the actual plot points and character arcs got resolved by the end of the show.

Fine, sequel hooks, whatever. The point still stands, if they had no intention of making a continuation they might as well not even have bothered. Like seriously, if you get more than twice as many episodes as most cartoons, why not follow up on them?

Oh and no, the episode about April's mom did not answer it. April wonders if she might still be alive by the end and Leo tells her she shouldn't give up hope. So I am calling oxshit on that one, the show never established she was actually dead for sure, they implied they might follow up on it, they never did and the writer confirming it online is literally the only confirmation we got. Just because they never did an episode where they actively went out to look for her, that doesn't mean this wasn't an idea they threw out there and just ignored.

It's not even like the main plot of the show was even that good, it falls apart pretty quickly if you try to analyse it, and coupled with nonsense like this I don't really understand why anyone felt satisfied with the story.

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

I wasn't a fan of the Mona Lisa design, Since they made her a Space Salamander instead of a mutant from Earth.

I'm confused, is your problem the design or the backstory? Because I would say both are an improvement in some sense.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by neatoman

I'm confused, is your problem the design or the backstory? Because I would say both are an improvement in some sense.

The problem has more to do with the characters, They like creating new characters, and then slapping the name of a classic character, and pretend that its one of the classic characters.
Also her name wasn't really Mona Lisa, It was a name Raph gave to her.

One of the things this show did was have Michelangelo giving all the mutants a name.

I wouldn't say the backstory is any improvement when its nothing like the original character, Fortunately IDW stayed true the original in some way.

[IndigoErth]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

then slapping the name of a classic character, and pretend that its one of the classic characters.

The 2012 Neutrinos is probably one of the worst offenses imo in that regard, reusing the name on something else that is completely unrelated. They weren't necessarily a bad concept, but the naming seems lazy and would have been better off with one that was original.

I feel that doing that sort of thing also handicaps a potential reuse of a character/concept that might have been a decent one to bring back elsewhere in the franchise later (talking in general in the franchise, not 2012 Neutrinos specifically), but since it's just a "new" version of something else that will probably go back to a more recognizable form later if seen again... the new idea might not make a return.

Mona Lisa 2012 at least stayed a salamander-like being and already had an established (even if unseen) population/race of characters to make the alien angle make sense.

[Zog The Magnificent]

Originally Posted by neatoman

Fine, sequel hooks, whatever. The point still stands, if they had no intention of making a continuation they might as well not even have bothered. Like seriously, if you get more than twice as many episodes as most cartoons, why not follow up on them?

Oh and no, the episode about April's mom did not answer it. April wonders if she might still be alive by the end and Leo tells her she shouldn't give up hope. So I am calling oxshit on that one, the show never established she was actually dead for sure, they implied they might follow up on it, they never did and the writer confirming it online is literally the only confirmation we got. Just because they never did an episode where they actively went out to look for her, that doesn't mean this wasn't an idea they threw out there and just ignored.

It's not even like the main plot of the show was even that good, it falls apart pretty quickly if you try to analyse it, and coupled with nonsense like this I don't really understand why anyone felt satisfied with the story.

Posing an idea is not the same thing as implying that there will be followup. It's just world building. The only two examples of subplots that they set up and then never finished that I can think of are Timothy, which had three episodes dedicated to it before it stopped appearing, and the potential return of Fugitoid. That one annoyed me because it undercuts his sacrifice, but then they never used him again so it was for nothing. But other details, like Arpil's mom, was never a subplot. It was simply a background detail that was part of the lore, and they decided to explore it for an episode. I had no expectations that it would ever be "answered" because the question was never really posed.

As for how I could be satisfied with the story, I guess I'll explain why I personally liked it. I felt that this show had very strong continuity, both in terms of the overall villain plots, minor events, and the character arcs. All of the primary characters had definitive arcs that had them progress from immature teenagers at the start of the show to full-fleged independant ninjas by the end. April stayed relevent the whole time, the stakes were high, characters actually died from time to time, Shredder has a pretty epic breakdown across the whole show, not to mention all of the various ways they implemented past elements from other incarnations. The plot moved foward, the status quo changed, the characters developed, the action was very good, and the show wrapped up basically all of its plots and ribbons, except for the ones I mentioned. It would have been better if it had stopped 16 episodes sooner, because yeah, the mad max finale was a terrible finale. But no one really considers it canon anyways. If anything, I think this show's main weakness was the same as the 2003 show: continuing past its natural conclusion. Other than that, I can't really understand why people who don't like it don't like it very much. The reasons always seem to be the same; "It has no plot, there are no stakes or character development, the plot falls apart if you think about it, it's just wasted potential," etc. These reasons always seem to be vague, in the case of "wasted potential," or flat out untrue, in the case of "the status quo never changes." What is it specifically that you don't like about this show? Is it just the percieved lack of general followup, or are there other things that you don't care for?