Ninja Turtles 'toons Old and New

So we have two uncommonly long-running animated series, and we recently got a sneak-peek of the new Nick-run show to debut next year, as well as a few vague general details. So, time for a new thread, methinks.

Frankly, I'm not entirely sure what to expect from this show. I've followed most of the incarnations of the turtles to some extent, and given all the different sorts of stories that have been written, I can't wrap my head around the idea of a new and original take on them that still remains somewhat faithful to the new core concept. Inside sources are saying that they're "not afraid to change things drastically", so I don't know.

So to kick things off, a question. Turtles Forever worked in part because the original toon's core, iconic villains, as part of the same group, could drive the plot without requiring too much exposition, even if you hadn't seen the original show. This is not the case with the 2003 cartoon villains. If the new show ever does its own version of Turtles Forever, with their version of the turtles meeting up with those from past cartoons', which 2k3 villains do you think they'd use?

edited 15th Mar '11 7:22:34 AM by DoKnowButchie

The teaser looks like an N64 game. I hope they improve their character models before releasing the show.

...can't watch the teaser...

Wait. Character models!? Its 3D!? NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

The link isn't working on my PC. So is it safe to say that Nick has screwed up the turtles?

The Turtles never die, do they?

To be honest it amazes me that the premise lasted as long as it did. TMNT, since its inception, has been basically a story that can't figure itself out. The original comics went from being an edgy crime thriller to being over-the-top sci-fi in less than three issues and from there were everything from madcap comedy to environmentalist propoganda. If I'm honest, the first cartoon was an improvement because it reigned this in somewhat and gave the idea a direction, though it still went wildly all over the place and couldn't decide whether to take itself seriously or play it for laughs.

As for the 2003 series, to be honest I didn't really get into it. Main thing is that, in addition to having the same damn problem as the comics (partially because it was trying to be more like them), I really couldn't stand the new versions of some of the characters. Especially Raphael. Hell, why did he have to have Knuckles' voice?

Could be worse, though. We could have the Turtles becoming superheroes using magic crystals, and then combining into a magical Saint Turtle.

And by sheer coincidence, I decided to re-watch the first few episodes of the 2003 series today.

As for the new series, the CGI looks like shit, but other than that, there isn't much to base an opinion on.

-> To be honest it amazes me that the premise lasted as long as it did.

Funny you should mention that. Peter Laird gave up the Turtle rights to Nick because he said it went on for too long for him, and he needed some change after sheparding this franchise for 25 years!

Well, the one big thing so far is that both the one piece of artwork shown so far and the preview clip show Donatello and Michelangelo sporting new-ish weapons; Michelangelo, if you look carefully, is actually a kusari-gama—a chain sickle, while Don's Bo now apparently has a retractable blade. There's also been hints that the turtles won't necessarily limit themselves to one weapon of choice, which would indeed appear to be One Big Change, if that's the case. Some have also speculated that that fact that all the turtles will now apparently sport bladed weapons means that we're going back to robotic mooks.

My thinking is that you've kind of answered your own question. Why do the turtles last? Because they're a canvas which you can use to tell almost any type of genre story, for almost any audience. Even Batman, which is an icon precisely because of this, has its limitations—you can't adapt, for example, a plot from Batman: The Brave and the Bold to the Nolan movie-verse, or vice-versa.

edited 15th Mar '11 8:23:35 AM by DoKnowButchie

Looks like ass. I'm not optimistic.

I like the primitve style.

Hard to judge something based on a small clip, but it looks good

Question: although it doesn't look like we're getting one at the outset, there exists the possibility that, with the property now fully under Nickelodeon's control, we might once again get a female turtle. Not Venus, specifically, but a female turtle.

What do y'all think about this? If you'd like to see one, how would you like to see her handled?

I'm of two minds about this. On one hand, what precedent exists—Venus—is not positive. There's also many ways in which it could be handled badly—see Venus again—and in the end, it feels wrong to have a turtle besides the original four. On the other hand, I feel that the series character demographics have always been incredibly skewed in favor of the males, and that, in retrospect, Eastman and Laird's decision not to include any females in their original series may have been a mistake. An understandable one, perhaps—they weren't thinking much about what they were doing—but a mistake nevertheless. Personally, I think I'd be okay with it with caveats: that her body shape be just like the other turtles' (as in, not noticeably slimmer and with definitively no Non-Mammal Mammaries), and, if they're going to have her be one of Splinter's, that she 1) have the name of an actual female Renaissance artist 2) be just as capable as the other turtles, and 3) doesn't become a love interest for any of the other turtles (or anyone, really—I'm happiest when the turtles are asexual). Done right, it could be downright groundbreaking.

Nick's budget for CG has gotten lower by the looks of it. Why couldn't they make an animated take where its more true to the original comics that are in the What Do You Mean, It's Not for Kids? section that most comic book goers know the turtles for?

Not too keen on Mike and Don's new weapons. There's not much to go on, but, fortunately, it doesn't seem to be in the style of the 1987 series like I had heard. But then again, it's a clip not even 30 seconds long. I'm gonna hold off on any other thoughts for now.

Do...

-squints-

Do those...

...CG models even have texture?!

1988 and 2001 made of win. That anime version, noooooo!

If you think about it, the Fred Wolf version of Raphael is kind of a precursor to Yakko Warner of Animaniacs. Both are voiced by Rob Paulsen and they are both smartasses who come up with amusing wisecracks.

Speaking of the old cartoon I stumbled upon an interesting article on Food Beast: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Pizzas IRL.

edited 14th Apr '15 1:06:20 AM by WorldTurtle2

James Rolfe did something similar, only he put those weird toppings on regular pizza slices.

edited 14th Apr '15 3:47:48 AM by DS9guy

2003 was the best version of TMNT. It shows that if you make good eps, good plots and a bit of character development that a show about ninja turtles can be taken seriously. 2003 Leo is still the best version of leo to this day. He was a good leader but could not handle the fact that even he himself is not perfect until he meat the ancient one. so many great eps that if I was to name them it would take days for me to finish.

I'd have to agree. Not only is it the most faithful adaptation of the original comics, but it surpasses it in quite a few ways.

likewise. i have a special place in my heart for the 2003 turtles.

I still need to get around to watching that series.

Nicktoons Network had it on for about a week then dropped it.

i saw a lot of episodes from the 2003 series a while back.

outside of some of the dialogue being hokey (though whatever it's a saturday morning cartoon) it was pretty innovative for an action show because there wasn't really a status quo. it felt like it was always moving towards something, like it was an actual story that was going somewhere.

@Scott:

-looks left-

-looks right-

a tone of 'em are on You Tube, last time i checked.