NO-bad review from hollywood reporter

tambour · 03-17-2007, 01:49 PM

Even CGI doesn't pump much life into these kung fu critters. The new film's calculations show the most in the mix of tame violence to maintain a PG rating and youthful humor and a skateboarding sequence to keep the appeal broad. Ultimately, the movie seems driven more by the need to keep a toy line and franchise alive than any creative inspiration.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/....jsp?&rid=8927

*VaughnMichael* · 03-17-2007, 01:55 PM

even worse the basterds website made my computer crash! *shakes fist*

ok now I'm reading this guys review...what a tard will people get it through there damn heads once and for all kids today are not as stupid as grownups things geez and we wonder why we have crap on tv like barny.

~~ThemanthatwouldbeRaphael~~ · 03-17-2007, 02:00 PM

What kind of review was that? Most of it was a synopsis of the movie. They didn't give any good reasons why the movie was "bad". There was as much thought put into that, as there is in an average Fox sitcom.

johnnyblaze · 03-17-2007, 02:06 PM

oh well, can't win em' all even though they never gave a reason as to why they disliked it in their review.

~~ThemanthatwouldbeRaphael~~ · 03-17-2007, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyblaze

oh well, can't win em' all even though they never gave a reason as to why they disliked it in their review.

Exactly, it's completley bogus.

1. The review obviously has never seen/read any of the interviews with Kevin that show how passionate he is about the franchise.

2. they only remember the Turtles from the old show, and thats clouding they're judgement some.

*Cure* · 03-17-2007, 04:38 PM

He gives plenty of reasons as to why he didn't like it. The plastic-y animation, the contrived family values, the afterthought villainy, the recycled sci-fi.........................

.............or are you guys automatically bashing his review because it's something you don't wanna hear?

~~ThemanthatwouldbeRaphael~~ · 03-17-2007, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cure4AIDS

He gives plenty of reasons as to why he didn't like it. The plastic-y animation, the contrived family values, the afterthought villainy, the recycled sci-fi.........................

.............or are you guys automatically bashing his review because it's something you don't wanna hear?

It would have been helpfull if he gave better examples. Like I said, most of the review was just a synopsis of the movie.

*Kendamu* · 03-17-2007, 05:46 PM

I'm not worried about it. For every single douchebag reviewer who can't remember anything beyond Bebop or Vanilla Ice there's probably a buttload of kids who have the exact opposite opinion. So Hollywood Reporter can go rot in Hell for not taking about 20 minutes to find an interview with Kevin or look at a short synopsis of the previous TMNT movies to get an idea of where this is going.

Raph'N'Roll · 03-17-2007, 09:15 PM

Well that guy's an idiot for thinking the animation was "plastic-y" I was blown away by it, and believe me I'd be first to criticize it.

*Spitfire* · 03-17-2007, 10:38 PM

Wow I stopped reading here "Bottom Line: This one feels and acts so '90s"

Good because newer movies suck ass anyways. I'll gladly invite the 90's to return.

*Rooish* · 03-17-2007, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cure4AIDS

He gives plenty of reasons as to why he didn't like it. The plastic-y animation, the contrived family values, the afterthought villainy, the recycled sci-fi.........................

.............or are you guys automatically bashing his review because it's something you don't wanna hear?

Heh, good point. I think I may feel the same way about the latter three complaints when I see the movie (especially the contrived family values, if that is indeed what happens). Although the animation looks good.

SavantiRomero · 03-18-2007, 01:05 AM

Family Values was a big part of the whole movie, without it, the story wouldn't have worked. Contrived? It was overspoken in certain scenes, otherwise it was well done. Can't please everyone all the time. I think this movie did awsome in trying to level the pleasing all round.

As to plasticy animation, it was not the absolute best CGI animation I've seen, but alot of that was contributed to the fact that the models were kept in a semi-cartoon state so in all honesty, the animation at times, did look a bit (but not too much) unrealistic.

I personally believe that a few weapons hit the ground a little to flat (no bounce at all) but those were little things. You can however tell that even the CGI artists/animators were spending ALOT of time/care on the main focus of the movie

.

I read the article. While I don't personally agree with everything they say, I can see their point/view.

*Buslady* · 03-18-2007, 08:25 AM

NEVER listen to those "professional" critics, they see nothing but bad in movies like these.
WHen people were coming out, we'd ask them if they liked it...ALL of the folks we asked said it was good. So...the general public views it as a good movie.

*Warhorse* · 03-18-2007, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buslady

NEVER listen to those "professional" critics, they see nothing but bad in movies like these.
WHen people were coming out, we'd ask them if they liked it...ALL of the folks we asked said it was good. So...the general public views it as a good movie.

You know, you are right about some of them critics, if not 90% of them. All they really do, is to concentrate on what they did not like about the movie, and to actually look for something to be wrong. I thought critics should be people who like to watch movies, not the opposite. And it's beyond me why people worry about what the (pros) think. They are not of the majority, at least not in my neck of the woods. I'd say. listen to what the regular joe says. Word of mouth, the animation is kick ass, the personalities and voices are as perfect as one can get. The only thing that people seem to not like is the sub plot of the monsters. But I think they wanted to save the foot rebuild stories for a sequel (if there is one) where they can produce a PG-13 flick as opposed to a PG one.

*Raph's Girl* · 03-18-2007, 11:07 AM

I read that so called review several days ago. The reviewer also states that this is the first foray for the TMNT into CGI.

See..these reporters (like that other idiot reviewer who states that Next Mutation was a cartoon) need to do what is called RESEARCH. Otherwise, he would have known that this was indeed not the first try out at CGI due to the proposed CGI tv series that you can go see the pilot of at the official TMNT site.

johnnyblaze · 03-18-2007, 11:15 AM

its not a big deal--besides how many positive reviews have we seen compared to the negative ones

*Rooish* · 03-18-2007, 11:31 AM

The positive reviews are all from TMNT fans, though.

johnnyblaze · 03-18-2007, 11:38 AM

so? isn't that what matters the most--that the fans like it

kerfootw · 03-18-2007, 12:31 PM

I read that a couple of months ago. He didn't say too much about the movie and talked about history. The $hithead!

*BigApple3AM* · 03-18-2007, 01:35 PM

Careful guys. You're sounding way too defensive. If someone didn't like it that's fine. I saw it and would only give it like a C. I still love the turtles, and it was great seeing them on the big screen, but if you thought this was going to be a hit with the critics you were deluding yourselves. It was really cheesey, but the name sort of implies that, or at least it used to. I don't think they ever say Teenage or Mutant in the movie. I thought the name was a great part of the turtles, i only abbreviate because I'm lazy, but for the movie I think they should have kept it spelled out. I think the CG made it pretty obvious that it wasn't going to be the same as the first film and that this would be a new thing mostly for little kids. Anyway enough of that tangent.

I disagree with a lot of the review but agree with others. The animation models themselves didn't give much to work with, I really REALLY hate that April. I remember the cover from the beginning of the original comics, with April and the guys standing around, then think of the movie April and really wonder where it went wrong. A lot the characters seemed more like charicatures of their old selves. Even though Pete was involved, if you're expecting anything like the mirage comics... DON'T. Go in expecting Turtles meets Power Rangers and your expectations won't be lowered like mine were.

03-17-2007, 01:49 PM	#1
tambour Mouser Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 7	NO-bad review from hollywood reporter Even CGI doesn't pump much life into these kung fu critters. The new film's calculations show the most in the mix of tame violence to maintain a PG rating and youthful humor and a skateboarding sequence to keep the appeal broad. Ultimately, the movie seems driven more by the need to keep a toy line and franchise alive than any creative inspiration. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/....jsp?&rid=8927

03-17-2007, 04:38 PM	#6
Cure Y'all need Jesus Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New Jersey Posts: 8,938	He gives plenty of reasons as to why he didn't like it. The plastic-y animation, the contrived family values, the afterthought villainy, the recycled sci-fi......................... .............or are you guys automatically bashing his review because it's something you don't wanna hear? __________________

03-17-2007, 10:38 PM	#10
Spitfire Writer • Director Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 12,035	Wow I stopped reading here "Bottom Line: This one feels and acts so '90s" Good because newer movies suck ass anyways. I'll gladly invite the 90's to return. __________________ Check out my online portfolio http://www.christopherpelletier.com/

03-18-2007, 08:25 AM	#13
Buslady WingsOfDarkness! Perkele! Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In 7803... Posts: 4,366	NEVER listen to those "professional" critics, they see nothing but bad in movies like these. WHen people were coming out, we'd ask them if they liked it...ALL of the folks we asked said it was good. So...the general public views it as a good movie. __________________

03-18-2007, 11:07 AM	#15
Raph's Girl Dierna Soul, Reporter Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Jakku Posts: 10,831	I read that so called review several days ago. The reviewer also states that this is the first foray for the TMNT into CGI. See..these reporters (like that other idiot reviewer who states that Next Mutation was a cartoon) need to do what is called RESEARCH. Otherwise, he would have known that this was indeed not the first try out at CGI due to the proposed CGI tv series that you can go see the pilot of at the official TMNT site. __________________

03-17-2007, 01:55 PM	#2
VaughnMichael I'm Baaaaaaccck! Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 11,833	even worse the basterds website made my computer crash! shakes fist ok now I'm reading this guys review...what a tard will people get it through there damn heads once and for all kids today are not as stupid as grownups things geez and we wonder why we have crap on tv like barny.

03-17-2007, 02:00 PM	#3
~~ThemanthatwouldbeRaphael~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Seventh Layer of Hell Posts: 1,929	What kind of review was that? Most of it was a synopsis of the movie. They didn't give any good reasons why the movie was "bad". There was as much thought put into that, as there is in an average Fox sitcom.

03-17-2007, 02:06 PM	#4
johnnyblaze Stone Warrior Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 677	oh well, can't win em' all even though they never gave a reason as to why they disliked it in their review.

03-17-2007, 05:46 PM	#8
Kendamu Sewerhead Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 2,890	I'm not worried about it. For every single douchebag reviewer who can't remember anything beyond Bebop or Vanilla Ice there's probably a buttload of kids who have the exact opposite opinion. So Hollywood Reporter can go rot in Hell for not taking about 20 minutes to find an interview with Kevin or look at a short synopsis of the previous TMNT movies to get an idea of where this is going.

03-17-2007, 09:15 PM	#9
Raph'N'Roll Hench Mutant Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Ireland Posts: 313	Well that guy's an idiot for thinking the animation was "plastic-y" I was blown away by it, and believe me I'd be first to criticize it.

03-18-2007, 01:05 AM	#12
SavantiRomero Hench Mutant Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 277	Family Values was a big part of the whole movie, without it, the story wouldn't have worked. Contrived? It was overspoken in certain scenes, otherwise it was well done. Can't please everyone all the time. I think this movie did awsome in trying to level the pleasing all round. As to plasticy animation, it was not the absolute best CGI animation I've seen, but alot of that was contributed to the fact that the models were kept in a semi-cartoon state so in all honesty, the animation at times, did look a bit (but not too much) unrealistic. I personally believe that a few weapons hit the ground a little to flat (no bounce at all) but those were little things. You can however tell that even the CGI artists/animators were spending ALOT of time/care on the main focus of the movie . I read the article. While I don't personally agree with everything they say, I can see their point/view.

03-18-2007, 11:15 AM	#16
johnnyblaze Stone Warrior Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 677	its not a big deal--besides how many positive reviews have we seen compared to the negative ones

03-18-2007, 11:31 AM	#17
Rooish Devil's Advocate Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Toronto, Ontario Posts: 2,130	The positive reviews are all from TMNT fans, though. __________________ Thanks evan2000 for the sig!

03-18-2007, 11:38 AM	#18
johnnyblaze Stone Warrior Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 677	so? isn't that what matters the most--that the fans like it

03-18-2007, 12:31 PM	#19
kerfootw Hench Mutant Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 405	I read that a couple of months ago. He didn't say too much about the movie and talked about history. The $hithead!

03-18-2007, 01:35 PM	#20
BigApple3AM Mad Scientist Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Supermarket Aisle Posts: 1,635	Careful guys. You're sounding way too defensive. If someone didn't like it that's fine. I saw it and would only give it like a C. I still love the turtles, and it was great seeing them on the big screen, but if you thought this was going to be a hit with the critics you were deluding yourselves. It was really cheesey, but the name sort of implies that, or at least it used to. I don't think they ever say Teenage or Mutant in the movie. I thought the name was a great part of the turtles, i only abbreviate because I'm lazy, but for the movie I think they should have kept it spelled out. I think the CG made it pretty obvious that it wasn't going to be the same as the first film and that this would be a new thing mostly for little kids. Anyway enough of that tangent. I disagree with a lot of the review but agree with others. The animation models themselves didn't give much to work with, I really REALLY hate that April. I remember the cover from the beginning of the original comics, with April and the guys standing around, then think of the movie April and really wonder where it went wrong. A lot the characters seemed more like charicatures of their old selves. Even though Pete was involved, if you're expecting anything like the mirage comics... DON'T. Go in expecting Turtles meets Power Rangers and your expectations won't be lowered like mine were.