The Big Picture: Shell Shock

[Frotality]

that campy atrocity invented my favorite batman villian? hows that for perspective...

but yeah, i really dont care that they are changing the TMNT mythos, my concern is that it is michael bay doing it. these kind of changes are usually indicative of a hack director trying to impose his shitty ideas over a marketable brand name, so it will sell no matter how awful it is. no one ever really cried about changing the squid alien in watchmen because it was actual artistic reasons and worked for the movie, some would even say better than the squid alien.

but you have to understand bob, we nerds are under relentless assault as our interests become more socially acceptable and asshats in suits figure that isnt good enough and want to rewrite everything to make it more marketable. i can understand being a bit overly-defensive in that situation.

 

[chaosyoshimage]

Besides, the Riddler's arch-nemesis needs to be The Question anyway; they'd look like a perfect freaking match, judging by that Batman oneshot anthology that released late 2011...

Oh! Could you tell me what that was? I loved The Question in Justice League: Unlimited and I want to read more comics with the character. I've just started getting into them more seriously due to Comixology on my Kindle Fire. Was it the Vic Savage or Renee Montoya Question?

 

[Korskarn]

Successful Adaptations that included significant deviations from the original:
- Jaws
- Godfather
- Princess Bride
- Towering Inferno
- Batman Begins
- Spider-Man (bio-webspinners anyone? Isn't Peter being a genius integral to his character?)

Successful Adaptations that only share one or two basic concepts:
- The Birds
- Conan
- I, Robot
- Running Man
- Planet of the Apes (Original and Remake - both were adaptations)
- Bourne (any of them)
- Robin Hood (ditto)
- Polyanna (showing this isn't really even a new thing)
- Blade Runner (which even ditched the original title)
- Total Recall (ditto)
- War of the Worlds (Aliens come from Mars, die to bacteria - everything else is up for grabs)
- How to Train Your Dragon
- Everything You Wanted to Know About Sex (But Were Afraid to Ask)
- The Iron Giant
- The Color of Money
- 21 Jump Street

Successful Adaptation which doesn't even share the same concept:
- Sandman

Edit: This list is by no means comprehensive, but it demonstrates that you can throw pretty much anything out of established lore as long as what you replace it with is compelling.

 

[Don't taze me bro]

Bob, Eggman is the name given to Sonic's nemesis by every game made this century. I never even imagined that he went by any other name until I saw some people get their panties in a bunch over it online.

Seriously, get over it.

No. I have to agree with Bob on this one. He was Dr. Robotnik in the Master System and Genesis versions of the game when the western world was first introduced to Sonic. It's not like it can just be ret-con'd out. I even educate my son, who loves Sonic games, that he was first called Dr. Robotnik.

 

[Simon Ashtear]

Successful Adaptations that included significant deviations from the original:
- Spider-Man (bio-webspinners anyone? Isn't Peter being a genius integral to his character?)

Successful Adaptations that only share one or two basic concepts:
- War of the Worlds (Aliens come from Mars, die to bacteria - everything else is up for grabs)


Edit: This list is by no means comprehensive, but it demonstrates that you can throw pretty much anything out of established lore as long as what you replace it with is compelling.

Successful, yes. Good, not always. I always thought that the bio-webspinners took something away from the character. Your War of the Worlds example brings up the question, what will be "up for grabs?" You can throw pretty much anything out so long as you replace it with something compelling. But since when has Michael Bay been compelling? That's what we're worried about.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

He will always be Robotnik. Eggman feels wrong.

I don't personally care about the aliens thing, doesn't bother me that much. What does is who is directing it (and in this case the people producing it worry me too). If it was a director I liked and respected and expected to do well then I wouldn't care because I'd expect them to pull it out, to make it work.
In this case I find that to be highly unlikely. I can't see this team pulling off the subtle and not so subtle ribbing of the industry, they're going to be the ones who should be mocked.

 

[Vault Citizen]

While we are mentioning stuff added to the continuity by a tv run I'd also like to point out that both Alfred's current look and the batcave (with the clock covered entrance) came from the first live action adaptation of Batman and were introduced into the comics.

I think Alfred is a perfect example of what Bob is talking about here, as he started off as a large, bald man that Batman and Robin hired because they felt sorry for him and from what I gather he was written for comic relief. It wasn't until his character was changed that he gained the crucial place he holds in the Batman mythos.

 

[Therumancer]

Interesting, I was under the impression that the Turtles were sold out to Archie comics and then the toy deals and cartoons were produced off of the Archie comics version.

 

[TheSchaef]

As far as I am concerned, everything line item Bob requested from the upcoming movie was present in the 2007 CGI film. Yes, the dialogue was more appropriate for 10 year olds, but guess what, TMNT in its 80's form is a 10-year-old's property. Given that, the dialogue was not horrible and in some places subtly clever, the story was pretty good, and the visual style was tremendous. I promise you that there will be nothing in the new movie that will look as good as this:

We could have had more and better of this. But the fanboys panned the film, Imagi closed its doors, and you guys get Michael Bay and guys in rubber suits again, losing the facial expressiveness and eyeball language afforded by this format. Call me bitter, but in my view, the fanboys asked for what they got, and my sympathy is tempered accordingly.

Gene Roddenberry absolutely hated Star Trek V, but I loved it. It showed the family relationship between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. I especially love the exchange at the end, "I lost a brother once. I was lucky I got him back." "I thought you said men like us don't have families." "I was wrong." Maybe not so much the lines, but the moment it created.

The relationship between these three was most strongly and ably depicted when a). Spock sacrificed his life for Kirk and the ship, b). before doing so, entrusting McCoy to carry his essense back to the katrik hall on Vulcan, and c). the two of them in turn sacrificed their careers to bring Spock back to Vulcan, with Kirk also losing his ship and his son in the process.

Vocalizing something in a scene that was demonstrated through drastic action in previous films is ham-handed at best, especially given three men that spent their entire careers together and should by now have said all they needed to say. Exploring this dynamic now is redundant, as was the ongoing theme of Spock trying to reconcile his human half (resolved in the previous film).

Star Trek V was poorly written, and directed about as well as can be done given the material. The one good scene in that film was not the final campfire scene, but the early one where the three of them are trying to sing. Yes, the two together tie the ends of the film to each other, but again, it was done to explore an unnecessary avenue of character development.

 

[Pedro Raposo]

This brings it into a whole new perspective, for me. Thanks, Bob.

 

[6_Qubed]

In the spirit of Moviebob, Mass Effect 3? Fallout 3. Broken Steel. Moving on.

While this might not be a terribly popular opinion to have, personally I try to see the good in what would otherwise be a weak performance in a brand I happen to be a fan of. First Bayformers movie? Dude! It was live-action Transformers! Bay couldn't fuck that up hard enough for my inner child not to be happy about it. Second one? Not as good, but the curmudgeonly Scottish Decepticon was cool as hell, and the death of Devastator in this movie provides an excellent go-to example of a Deus Ex Machina if you ever find yourself talking about them. Third one? Leonard Fuckin' Nemoy (that's actually his middle name DON'T DISPUTE ME) voiced an evil tranformer again. Oh yeah, remember the first Transformers movie? The cartoon one where every Transformer you liked got killed off? Leonard Fuckin' Nemoy voiced Galvatron. And that guy from Unsolved Mysteries was Ultra Magnus. And Eric Idle was a Junkticon and his fight music was by Weird Al Yankovic. And Orson Welles was Unicron, his last role in anything before he died. ...I'm, uhh, I'm kinda getting away from myself here. Go see the cartoon Transformers movie, is the point I'm trying to make. It's very good.

Anyway, back to good from the bad. I grew up watching Ninja Turtles every Saturday morning, I even had a few of their VHS tapes, and I have no intention of getting mad at whatever direction they take the turtles in, no matter how far it deviates from the norm. Let's be frank gang, we're talking about turtles who live in a sewer in New York, who become mutated into humanoids, who then become teenagers. Who then become ninja. And they love pizza. Seriousness departed a few sentences back, so I'm pretty sure a healthy sense of humor is a requirement in this situation.

EDIT: And they were raised by a rat. And they fight other ninja who are evil. And sometimes robots. And their best friend is a quasi-homeless Jason knockoff. And also a Hot Scoop reporter for some reason. Why yes I have been to TV Tropes before how can you tell.

 

[chaosyoshimage]

Besides, the Riddler's arch-nemesis needs to be The Question anyway; they'd look like a perfect freaking match, judging by that Batman oneshot anthology that released late 2011...

Oh! Could you tell me what that was? I loved The Question in Justice League: Unlimited and I want to read more comics with the character. I've just started getting into them more seriously due to Comixology on my Kindle Fire. Was it the Vic Savage or Renee Montoya Question?

Unless Vic Sage got an hourglass figure with subtle breasts, it's the Renee Question. And frankly, the script for that one-shot story was freaking nonsensical. It's the radically different philosophies of questions that'd make them so interesting as arch nemesi. Where The Question uses human curiosity as a means of enlightenment and bettering ourselves, The Riddler uses questions as a means to challenge humanity, and leave them without the answer, forever trapped in questions.

Personally, I'm finding the 1980's Vic Sage series to be a bit... lacking. Neither as charming or entertaining as the Justice League Unlimited Question. I've yet to read volumes 5 and 6 yet; does that series pick up in its writing?

And holy fuck, you have a Kindle Fire, too? You can get The Question on that thing? Which novels?

I'll see if I can get you a scan of the cover, or even the story itself (as it alone sure as fuck ain't worth its $5.99 asking price).

The only Question comics I've read was a back up feature in the Batwoman starring issues of Detective Comics. This was the Renee Montoya Question. I buy comics for my Kindle Fire on Comixology, I usually get them on sale for $1. I haven't read too many yet, but it's been a great way to get into them. Unfortunately I couldn't find any Question comics on the service.