TMNT: Mutant Mayhem

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Rise 2.0
And we are back to this being repurposed from Rise assets, which I remember pointing out, was hotly resisted and then the data came out that is what studios do.

Rise sucked, failed and they rebuilt the assets into this, movie first.

Originally Posted by BornAgain

This has no connection to “Rise…”.

Originally Posted by Optimus Primer

What assets can a 2D animated show in a different style share? That makes no sense. This obviously replaced it in the sense that it's a new TMNT show but otherwise there's no connection.

Uh, yeah, what Optimus Primer said. What exactly is repurposed from Rise? The character models are clearly different and the backgrounds don't seem recycled either. Maybe they are using the same animation techniques or software to make this, but by that logic The Simpsons movie was "recycled" from the Curious George movie from the year prior.

At most they might be using scripts from Rise that never went into production, but how would you even be able to tell that from this teaser?

[Zog The Magnificent]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Rise 2.0
And we are back to this being repurposed from Rise assets, which I remember pointing out, was hotly resisted and then the data came out that is what studios do.

Rise sucked, failed and they rebuilt the assets into this, movie first.

Originally Posted by BornAgain

This has no connection to “Rise…”.

Originally Posted by Optimus Primer

What assets can a 2D animated show in a different style share? That makes no sense. This obviously replaced it in the sense that it's a new TMNT show but otherwise there's no connection.

Originally Posted by neatoman

Uh, yeah, what Optimus Primer said. What exactly is repurposed from Rise? The character models are clearly different and the backgrounds don't seem recycled either. Maybe they are using the same animation techniques or software to make this, but by that logic The Simpsons movie was "recycled" from the Curious George movie from the year prior.

At most they might be using scripts from Rise that never went into production, but how would you even be able to tell that from this teaser?

Guys, you're all taking language that was clearly poetic way too literally. Obviously a 2D animated show doesn't actually have "assets."

All that was being said was that the basic building blocks that made Rise what it was (in terms of overall identity) have clearly been at the very least a large influence in this new iteration.

Whether or not you agree with that opinion is up to you, but acting as though the argument was that this show was literally made of "Rise Assets" is a misrepresentation of what was actually said at best.

[CyberCubed]

The entire writing and animation staff on this is likely completely different than anyone who worked on Rise too.

[IndigoErth]

Poetic, or probably just mistaken.

As far as 2D goes, I suppose decent but discarded ideas could be repurposed, likewise animation styles I guess (which kinda does look a little similar?), but "assets"... no, not like you could between 3D projects.

[BornAgain]

Originally Posted by Zog The Magnificent

Guys, you're all taking language that was clearly poetic way too literally. Obviously a 2D animated show doesn't actually have "assets."

All that was being said was that the basic building blocks that made Rise what it was (in terms of overall identity) have clearly been at the very least a large influence in this new iteration.

Whether or not you agree with that opinion is up to you, but acting as though the argument was that this show was literally made of "Rise Assets" is a misrepresentation of what was actually said at best.

Nah, we took it the most logical way imo. The post referenced “rebuilt” and “repurposed” assets. That doesn’t read as figurative and it’s not really clear what it would mean if it wasn’t literal. They “repurposed” the spirit of “Rise..”? I’m not seeing that either.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by Zog The Magnificent

Guys, you're all taking language that was clearly poetic way too literally. Obviously a 2D animated show doesn't actually have "assets."

All that was being said was that the basic building blocks that made Rise what it was (in terms of overall identity) have clearly been at the very least a large influence in this new iteration.

Whether or not you agree with that opinion is up to you, but acting as though the argument was that this show was literally made of "Rise Assets" is a misrepresentation of what was actually said at best.

Then don't use the word "assets" when you mean "inspiration" or "ideas". Doing so implies something was directly reused, it is not a word typically used poetically.

And even if we accept that something about the concept being reused, what is that? Seriously, what is being reused? If I were to describe Rise in terms of what it did differently from what came before, it would be like this:

• The main focus is a plotline is about an underground city full monsters.
• The Turtles have magic weapons that give them supernatural powers used throughout the series.
• There is an emphasis on over the top fight scenes.
• Most older characters are disregarded in favor of brand new ones.
• There are several notable exaggerations/changes to how the characters typically behave, for example with Splinter being lazy and inattentive.
• The character design of the turtles makes them look extremely different from each other and how they traditionally looked.

I could probably go on but the point is that it's possible to describe in clear terms what Rise was like and what the direction of it was. Likewise it should be possible to concretely describe the direction of MM/Tales as well, thus making it possible to compare the two. But saying that MM/Tales is similar to Rise because it took the "assets" from it is hardly enough, you actually have to explain what it is about MM/Tales that is similar to Rise in order to argue for the comparison. If you can't say something like "The way the characters behave is similar of X and Y", then you don't even a bad argument, literally don't have an argument to begin with. And from where I am sitting, much of how I can describe Rise doesn't apply to Mutant Mayhem or (seemingly) Tales at all.

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to defend either MM/Tales or Rise here, or even make excuses. I'm saying you have to at least explain what the supposed similarites are in order to have anything that even resembles a point. Because from where I'm sitting, I really don't notice many similarities beyond what may just be coincidental or natural due to being adaptation of the same comic book series.

If no actual argument is made here, then from my point of view the logic just looks like:

1. "Rise was bad"
2. "Mutant Mayhem was bad"
3. "Rise was the most recent animated iteration before Mutant Mayhem"
4. "I can see some similarities between the two (which I won't state)"
5. "Therefore Rise directly inspired Mutant Mayhem"
6. "That's why they both suck"

Which is just faulty logic. You could do this with just about any two iterations of the franchise. Look, here's me explaining why TNM was bad:

1. "TMNT III was a bad movie"
2. "TNM was a bad show"
3. "TMNT III was the last live-action adaptation before TNM"
4. "They both had bad puppets, corny jokes and pointless plot turns"
5. "Therefore TMNT III must have inspired the direction of TNM"
6. "That's why they both suck"

And here's me explaining why the 2003 show and the first season of the 2012 show were both good:

1. "TMNT 2003 was a good show"
2. "TMNT 2012 is a good show so far"
3. "TMNT 2003 was the last TMNT show before 2012"
4. "They both ignored the FW show for the most part and had some adaptation of old comic book issues"
5. "Therefore TMNT 2003 must have inspired TMNT 2012"
6. "That's why they're both good"

Or how explaining why the last season of TMNT 2012 and Rise were bad?

1. "TMNT 2012 ended poorly"
2. "Rise is bad"
3. "TMNT 2012 was the last show before Rise"
4. "They both featured tons of human characters turning into mutants and had a plot about Shredder being brought back from the dead"
5. "Therefore TMNT 2012 must have inspired Rise"
6. "That's why they both suck"

It's just meaningless to argue like this because the similarities could be completely coincidental, even if they weren't how do you prove that and why are these ideas inherently bad? If you think MM/Tales and Rise both suck and suck for similar reasons, that's fine but you have to explain why they are similar and why these similarites are bad.

[neatoman]

Like I said, the only reason I can see behind stating something like this is that someone might think both Rise and Mutant Mayhem are bad and just assume there is a connection because Rise ended half a year before Mutant Mayhem came out. Which is, at best, spurious reasoning. If you think there is a connection, at least try to show there is a connection.

Rise and Mutant Mayhem are part of the same franchise, you can find similarities between them and almost any other entry in said franchise, it's meaningless to just say they're similar and not explain why. Even if some of these similarities are unique to these two iterations and/or one directly inspired the other, how do you prove that? How are these unique elements not a natural "next step to take" in relation to any other previous iteration? And even if that is not the case, how is it not possible these similarities still aren't just a coincidence?

[CyberCubed]

This is a big debate over literally nothing

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

This is a big debate over literally nothing

It's not even a debate, it's just pointing out that it is dumb to assume these two iterations of the franchise have anything to do with each other.

[Zog The Magnificent]

Originally Posted by neatoman

It's not even a debate, it's just pointing out that it is dumb to assume these two iterations of the franchise have anything to do with each other.

I should clarify that I don't think they *actually* have anything to do with each other in a technical sense. From my view, they both take the same kind of irreverent tone, they both have a black April, they both have a version of Splinter who's kind of a loser, both have all four turtles being nearly the same character rather then being more distint, etc. And it's not even the same way as the '87 show, which despite all its faults had a certain charm to it. Both shows have a lot of core features in common, and both feel like they were made by people who really don't like or understand the franchise. They're different shows, but they're clearly made of the same basic pile of megabloks, instead of the legos the rest of the franchise is constructed of.

[Cowabung-Gal]

Warning: Language



Thank you for pointing this flaw out, Tatoruzu.

[shihe]

Easy solution would be for them to take food thrown away by restaurants and grocery stores
At least it gives actual Grey morality rather than passing bad actions for good.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by shihe

Easy solution would be for them to take food thrown away by restaurants and grocery stores
At least it gives actual Grey morality rather than passing bad actions for good.

I don't know how it's done in America but here the thrown away food is put into a garbage compactor immediately, it's not exactly possible to retrieve it.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by neatoman

I don't know how it's done in America but here the thrown away food is put into a garbage compactor immediately, it's not exactly possible to retrieve it.

I don't think that's a thing here.

[IndigoErth]

Wish it had come up more, opening the movie with the Turtles as shoplifters... yeah, real good message there, Rogen.

Raph even wasted those loaves of bread. Stabbing your grimy sais through them? That's gonna mold within a couple days in a dank sewer.

[Cowabung-Gal]

Originally Posted by IndigoErth

Raph even wasted those loaves of bread. Stabbing your grimy sais through them? That's gonna mold within a couple days in a dank sewer.

You know what their defense will be: “It’s a kids movie about mutant ninja turtles. Who cares about the logic?”

[Zulithe]

Originally Posted by IndigoErth

Wish it had come up more, opening the movie with the Turtles as shoplifters... yeah, real good message there, Rogen.

They are scavenging their environment. If they could only procure food by purely legitimate means they would have very limited options. Splinter, an actual former rat, an animal known for its 'thieving' ways in the human world, is their father/master/teacher, so what do you expect? There is also the outsider aspect: they are not a part of the human world, feel like they would never be allowed to either (something that is a journey in this movie, where they eventually are able to join it fully), why wouldn't you steal to get by in that situation? Splinter has reason to fear and hate humans at the start because as a rat he fully knows how much humans hate him. There is also a flashback scene that further establishes how much humans reject them.

Think about many famous stories where this is a theme. How about Oliver Twist. He's the protagonist, but due to his circumstances, he joins a band of thieves because that's what he has to do to survive. That doesn't make him any less of an admirable character, because the audience understands why.

Let's go a little farther. The turtles live in the sewer in just about every iteration of the TMNT. Do you think they are legally allowed to be living there? They are basically squatting on government owned/controlled land and are subject to being totally removed if anyone knew they were down there. I guess April should have turned them in to the city the moment she saw them living down there... after all that's the right thing to do, correct? They are squatting on city property. That's against the law. It's sending a bad message that April just goes along with their lawbreaking ways. They are also stealing electricity, probably water as well.

The turtles are in a very different place by the end of MM. While they are stealing to get by at the start of the movie, you wouldn't imagine them doing the same thing by the time the movie ends. There has been a character arc for their entire family.

The lengths some of you will go to find any problem with this movie so you can find more angles to attack it. It's truly amazing.

[IndigoErth]

Where have I attacked it? Not all critiques or not being crazy about certain parts doesn't always equal an attack.

Is it what I'm wanting from TMNT right now? No. Were there things they decided to do that I'd have rather thay didn't? (Shoplifting scene, cringy stuff, school, etc.) Yes. Did I at least still find it a fun watch? Also yes. Am I confusing people with no perception of a grey area (not saying you nessessarily)? I dunno, maybe.

[Andrew NDB]

To weigh in on this again, I don't personally like it because it hasn't really been a thing until now but I'm not too bent out of shape about the Turtles stealing. People expecting the TMNT to be "honorable ninja" are pretty dumb from the start, since "honorable ninja" is an oxymoron.

Originally Posted by Cowabung-Gal

You know what their defense will be: “It’s a kids movie about mutant ninja turtles. Who cares about the logic?”

Yeah, the usual usage of Crisler's Law.

[BornAgain]

No wonder Nickelodeon doesn’t want to do anything adult with TMNT. Such a weak hang up.