Months ago, when I read quotes from J.J. Abrams, the director of the new "Star Trek" film, wherein he professed to not being a fan of the original show or, really, the whole "Star Trek" franchise, I took it with a grain of salt. It sounded like a little bit of clever misdirection, a kind of "Don't worry -- I'm not a hidebound, anal retentive "Star Trek" geek who is afraid to do anything new" message. I guess you could say I didn't really believe him.
Well, after sitting through two mostly painful hours of his version of "Star Trek" at the local Cinemark, I have to admit that I believe him now. It's difficult to think that Paramount would entrust their most valuable property to someone who clearly does not "get it". This movie is not "Star Trek". It's some kind of busy, noisy space adventure with some characters with the same names, and with vaguely similar personalities, as the ones in "Star Trek", flying through space in a ship that kind of looks like it belongs in "Star Trek", and even bears the name "U.S.S. Enterprise".
But it's not "Star Trek".
From Spock making out with Uhura (really... and more than once!) to scenes supposedly set on a 23rd century starship but looking all too much like the redressed 20th century factory where they were really filmed (complete with bulky steel pipes and clunky valve wheels), this is a movie calculated to annoy and depress anyone who had hoped for a respectful "reboot" of a beloved and well-established franchise.
With forty years of "Star Trek" history to draw on, it's astonishing to me that this is the best that we could get. And it's almost a year late! (What, exactly, were they working on all that time?) There's a wonderful movie waiting to be made which tells the story of how the U.S.S. Enterprise crew first came together. It's a movie I'd been waiting to see. I guess I'll have to wait some more.
The only saving grace in all this is that Abrams' "retconning" of "Star Trek" history is just another movie, and -- if the powers that be will it -- can be effectively erased from continuity and be looked at as what it essentially is... an alternate universe "Star Trek" exercise.
I will say that it was not entirely without merit -- some of the key cast did excellent work with their interpretations of the established "Star Trek" characters, and some of the visuals were very impressive.
But it is still (at least to me) a HUGE disappointment. I think the most depressing thing is that if this movie makes a lot of money (which it seems poised to do), this could be the future of "Star Trek": lots of sound and fury, signifying nothing. -- PL
All artwork, photos and text © 2010 Peter Laird, unless otherwise noted.
196 comments:
I'm going to see the movie this weekend, but have my reservations. Now I think you've confirmed my suspicions. I've watched a bit of the "lost" television show, but quickly got bored with the pulling things out of no where to keep you watching with no real point other than to keep you watching tactics. I suspect this movie is going to feel the same way... oh well, it's something to do before the next ninja turtles movie.
I'm sure I'll have a good time... something about being in a dark room with a bunch of strangers experiencing a movie for the first time.
Well, the seals the deal for me then. I was hesitant about seeing it and now there's now way I'm going to bother... wish there was something else good on at the cinemas here though!
I'm sorry, but what exactly were you unhappy with? Was it that the set designs didn't look futuristic enough? Did it not match the impeccable visions of the future that TOS managed to evoke? :-P
Strange, I'm a Trekkie myself, but I loved the movie. Maybe it's an age thing, but the movie held well on its own, and nothing about it invalidated those DVDs on your shelf, it didn't erase one's memories, and heck, the original timeline still exists in the Trek universe, this is just an altered timeline.
I LOVED this movie lol. I really felt like they did capture the feel and the fun of Star Trek
Oh gee.... I'm sorry Peter that you didn't like it. I completely loved it, and while not a hard-core cosplay-level Trekkie, I do have my "Trek Creds", having grown up with the original series as you did.
First I loved the casting; it was so much fun to watch these "new" versions of the characters capture some of the iconic gestures and voice intonations of their predecessors. Chris Pine's Kirk had that cocky recklessness that a younger Kirk would have and once I convinced myself I wasn't watching Sylar, Zachary Quinto I thought was a wonderful Spock.I thought the writing was smart with just enough of those signature phrases sprinkled throughout the dialogue. The action was nonstop pretty much the whole time, as today's audience has come to expect. Maybe that's what didn't feel right to you? It certainly was not 1968 Star Trek; it was very 2009.
Anyway, I'm sorry you found it disappointing. Just wanted to add my counter-point.
Live long and prosper. Yo.
;o)
~Donna
See Peter this is why it is so important that this new TMNT film is done correctly.
Someone who knows the turtles entire vast history should be doing this next film.
I'd like to nominate myself but since that's not about to happen I really hope you guys think long and hard before you choose who does this film.
I also really hope that Henson is involved in some way shape or form.
May I also suggest that the figures for this new TMNT movie be done by NECA as they will look exactly like what they are supposed to look like.
Anyway I've yet to see this new Trek but I will soon and I'll come back and share my thoughts.
Shame you didn't like it though as such a big fan I hope you can understand now when fans of the turtles get dissapointed by things.
-Vaughn Michael
Interesting thoughts...
I am far from a Trek fan, but I was a big JJ Abrams fan, until "Cloverfield". After all the hype, I didn't really know what to expect when I saw that movie but after seeing it I can categorically say that it is the worst film ever made (and I've seen some really bad movies). After Cloverfield, my faith in JJ was completely lost and as a result I've yet to see this film because I didn't really trust what the result would be.
Also I think it needs to be said...Reboots need to be abolished completely. I feel like for the last 10 years the world's idea well has dried up. I'm so tired of all this rehash trying to cash in on once great properties. Unless it is completely necessary or 100% true to the original source material I'm so sick of this re-imagined stuff that ends up being a very obvious time piece of when it was made.
A lot of my friends have already seen the film and loved it, but something tells me that eye candy played a bigger role in that, then did the storytelling. I think I might be waiting on this one.
I liked it, but I agree it didnt really feel like a Star Trek Film (at least in the Roddenberry sense) It felt like rather like a star trek version of a Elseworlds tale.
As a stand alone film, I enjoyed it, but I don't particularly think it sets up for a good relanch of the series. I'd rather have it as a stand alone experiment.
-->> ..i am not the best ' TREK fan.
People ask me what my fave is i'd say D S 9 and get some funny looks.
I didn't even see the last ' Generation 'film.
What is a good 'TREK film ?? ..ANYONE ?!
I hate to say it, but this is how most of us feel about the Turtle franchise. Things about the Turtles we knew and loved have been changed so drastically in the new comic, we can hardly recognize them anymore. It's kind of depressing when something you love just how it is and how it was meant to be changes. It loses some of its magic. I'm not trying to tear you apart on your own blog, I just wanted to point it out as something to think about. You know what it's like to be disappointed about a fandom you love, so please put yourself into the place of the fans as you continue the comic books and the Turtle franchise as a whole. How you feel about the new direction Star Trek is going in is how we've felt about the Turtle franchise for a while now.
I think the Turtles are the most exciting now than they've ever been. I enjoy what is going on with Vol. 4 of the comics and thought the 2K3 cartoon series (and toyline) was one of the absolute best things to ever happen to the turtles (perhaps because of its direct adaptation and homage to the original Mirage storyline - alone with those wonderful tweaks to it). I'm more excited about it now than I've ever been. I have a good feeling about the upcoming movie and hope the absolute best for it - both for the ones making it and most importantly for us, the fans. The cgi movie was enjoyable and did some new things we've never seen before, but I'd be lying a bit if I said I was completely head over heels for it. I mean, naturally I'm going to enjoy anything TMNT, but I clearly thought that the movie was going to take a much different direction. In some ways it did do the things that I hoped it would, but then it would turn full circle on itself and negate some of the steps forward it made (ie: the main storyline with the 13 monsters, ect I did not like, I didn't like how Karai was introduced but never properly explained as a character, and I was hoping for a more gritty film in general more akin to the comics, because thats what a lot of the hype had many of us believing was the case. However, the Raph and Leo rooftop fight scene in the rain was worth the price of admission (and purchase) alone.)
Anyway, I'm drifting a bit off track here, but just trying to give a perspective from someone who's highly enjoying the current output, as to not be included in the "we" talk of the above poster. As a fan who was a devout fan as a child and a natural cynic, I have been very impressed with the post 2k3 (well, 2002-on - barring Fast Forward and BTTS, which was a bit too "moderized" for my tastes) output from the Turtles and co.
Here's to the best days ahead!
-r
I completely agree with Peter Laird on the new Star Trek movie. Pretty much every word.
I will say, however, that it's a highly entertaining film. Very riveting. I'd recommend it to anyone.
But it's a very strange thing, this movie. I mean, I get that it's for new fans who have never really been involved in Star Trek... so why not just do a real reboot? Or if they wanted to do a prequel, why not do a proper prequel?
As it is, it is a strange pitch: "What if Kirk wasn't really Kirk... and what if we saw this new Kirk's origins?" It's like a new, less-interesting mirror universe or something.
It's mostly just JJ being chickenshit. He wouldn't even attach himself as director until Nimoy committed... because he knew without Nimoy, this movie wouldn't even have a shred of credibility to it.
The kinds of stories that Star Trek tells you can tell them in any era... there is simply no good reason to go back to the well with Kirk'n Spock. I'd be fascinated to see things go further, perhaps even to the 29th century, to a TV show focusing on Starfleet when, in addition to their normal duties, also police Time (as we saw in VOY and ENT).
Speaking of which, why wouldn't the 29th century Starfleet temporal police swarm over the events of this film and fix things lickety split?
Anyway, I agree with you, Peter.
- Andrew Modeen
I am a HUGE DS9 fan, Tokka. I even have a bajoran earring. LOL
You're literally the first person I've heard diss this movie.
You're entitled to, but after calling it "noisy," "busy," and "signifying nothing," I'm curious as to what you found the movie to be lacking.
I like the Shakespeare quote at the end :)
I haven't had a chance to see the film yet, so I am disappointed to read this post, but not the least bit surprised. Film is driven by what sells, and a movie like this can't depend on the die-hard trekkie fans. It has to appeal to a much bigger audience, and the film probably succeeded in that. It's a new generation of fans, and the franchise has to evolve to cater to their tastes. What can you do?
Daniel Schwarz said...
...a movie like this can't depend on the die-hard trekkie fans... and the franchise has to evolve to cater to their tastes.I think you hit the nail on the head, Daniel. For me the movie covered both bases; enough of the old Trek to satisfy that nostalgia and enough flash and dazzle to score as a great "Saturday Matinee" action film.
And as Vaughn and Dawn have pointed out, this is sort of the same dilemma that it seems the TMNT franchise faces. Old (relatively old!) die-hard fans want to see more of what we've loved in the past, but if there's an intention to bring in new fans, there's a need to keep pace with what audiences expect to see today.
I think there are definitely some parallels here between the Star Trek franchise and the TMNT.
It's funny how different people can look at the exact same thing and have completely different reactions.
Not only did I love the new Star Trek...it might be my favorite Star Trek anything ever.
" Chris said...
You're literally the first person I've heard diss this movie.
You're entitled to, but after calling it "noisy," "busy," and "signifying nothing," I'm curious as to what you found the movie to be lacking."
Hmm... let's see... well, heart, soul, respect for the franchise and the long-established personalities of the characters, and -- not to be cute -- logic. In my opinion, of course. -- PL
Your thoughts on this pretty much signify that you didn't really get it. You say Abrams "didn't get it," but really, I think you're the one missing things.
Its posts like this that make me terrified for the future of TMNT.
Of course I don't want a "noisy" space-flick for my new TMNT movie... But I want a decent movie, which is what this was. I feel like you don't have any sort of connection to what fans want anymore, if that weren't the case we wouldn't have gotten the 2007 TMNT movie. We would have gotten something...well, decent.
Instead of unfounded pissing and moaning, maybe you should take some notes on how to make the next Ninja Turtles flick end up more like Batman Begins, and less like Ninja Turtles 3, or Next Mutation.
PL said...
Hmm... let's see... well, heart, soul, respect for the franchise and the long-established personalities of the characters, and -- not to be cute -- logic. In my opinion, of course. -- At the risk of really pissing you off I feel compelled (and have been urged by several of those "us" that Dawn referred to) to point out that these are some of the very concerns that many people have voiced about the direction that some of the TMNT material has recently gone.
To those of us frustrated by Vol 4 and the last two incarnations of the 4Kids cartoon series, this seems a tad ironic.
~Donna
Dawn :- most of us? Do not think so. The Tales books did start to wane but I think Dan Berger and Tristan Jones are both doing fantastic jobs on that book now. I would say that right now the comics are better than they have been since Volume 4 went on hiatus. I do not know where you are getting this "we can hardly recognize them anymore" bullshit from. I had a harder time recognizing them in the original comics when Kevin and Peter or someone currently involved with Mirage wasn't working on them.
Ken:- The only thing that is unfounded and baseless here is the assumption that because Peter did not like Star Trek the upcoming Turtles reboot will be bad. Where has the new Star Trek movie ever been linked in any way outside of your own pithy attack here to the new Turtles movie, which at the moment has no one on board except for Peter, Gary Richardson, Scott Mednick, Galen Walker and Legendary Pictures (which I will assume means Warner Brothers too)? There is no writer, or director or even a cast to speak of and only a few vague ideas have been mentioned (the based on the comics and suits with cgi faces things).
Terrified for the future of TMNT based on this post? Pretty ridiculous thing to say.
Hugh, I was speaking mainly about volume 4. I've heard decent things about the new Tales comics, and I have a few of the earlier issues, but the volume 4 comic has sort of turned me off of the comics completely, which is a real shame because I used to love the comics so much.
And "We can hardly recognize them" is NOT bullshit if you talk to the majority of fans (both online and off) that I've talked to. Many of us feel the same way. Last I saw (although admittedly, as stated above, I stopped reading at a certain point) Raph was a friggin' DINOSAUR or lizard...or whatever, Don was three inches tall, Mike had his teeth knocked out, and the greatest, most AWESOME one of all? April was drawn with the friggin' KIRBY PENCIL. What. The. Hell. And I'm sorry if you like all of that, but to me, it's not imaginitive so much as it is maiming the characters and taking them to a place FAR beyond any kind of believability they could have and once did have. That stuff wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that the things that made the TMNT special to begin with--that they were the only ones of their kind, and they couldn't go out in daylight and just walk around freely, that they were misunderstood, they were "freaks", yet they did what was right and saved the very people who would have shunned them/locked them up/killed them is completely gone. There are all sorts of creatures just walking around now like it's a common, every day thing. The turtles no longer have to hide. They don't have the same "This is all there is" kind of darkness about them that made them cool. THESE are the things I don't like.
Plus, where is all the ninja stuff? Where's that deep sense of family? All of this was lost in volume 4 and to me, THAT is what the TMNT are all about.
Amen, Dawn.
For myself, what I miss is that four-little-guys-against-the-world as an underlying theme. That isolation, their uniqueness in the world, the sense of being outcasts who still try to do the right thing, the need to depend upon one another because, with only a couple of exceptions, they are all they have got-- those are the things about the Turtles that touched my heart. Ninja action/adventure/stealth are important components. But to me, the "heart and soul" of the TMNT lies in those qualities above that connect them to each other and to us.
~Donna
Hugh said: "I do not know where you are getting this "we can hardly recognize them anymore" bullshit from. I had a harder time recognizing them in the original comics when Kevin and Peter or someone currently involved with Mirage wasn't working on them.Frankly Hugh, I find it rather "flame"-like for anyone to refer to someone else's opinion as "bullshit".
Of course, some would say so is quoting such parts and addressing the author of such words directly.
I don't particularly care for the storyline of vol. 4 myself. What Peter Laird missed in the new Star Trek movie ("heart, soul, respect for the franchise and the long-established personalities of the characters") I miss in the current incarnation. I love Tales. I've not gotten "used" to Vol. 4. It's all a matter of perspective. That makes me one of the "Most of us".
I'm sure there is some grand scheme in all of this that I'm missing and it will all be addressed in the future, and we'll all go "ah-ha..."
Meanwhile, I rewatch the 2K3 series, I read Tales, I hang out usually lurking here, I post at Mikey's and I count down to Comic-Con when (HOPEFULLY) I can be part of a rather decent 25th anniversary celebration.
Cynthia
I could not agree with you more, GW.
Many of us feel the same way. Last I saw (although admittedly, as stated above, I stopped reading at a certain point) Raph was a friggin' DINOSAUR or lizard...or whatever, Don was three inches tall, Mike had his teeth knocked out, and the greatest, most AWESOME one of all? April was drawn with the friggin' KIRBY PENCIL.>>>>>>
See, I don't mind any of those changes....
The BIGGEST problems I have with cartoons in general, is that characters NEVER Change. People don't go through life wearing the same yellow jumpsuit :). Should the guys forever be teenagers and never age, never learn, or change?
Mikey is part of an alien resistance force if memory serves. Raph's Super Mutation is cool, but would be even better if he got to use it in an action adventure storyline. Don being 3 inches tall would force the other guys to get more involved in the technical side of things. And I love the fact that with April having just as unique an origin as the guys makes her a bit more interesting. Also gives her more to think about as a character.
The only problem I remember from volume 4, is that it wasn't as.......important as the plots in the 2K3 series. Best way I could describe it. You could mis an issue or two and not really care, where as the 2k3 series was just fun action adventure. The last Issue of Volume 4 could reveal it was all a dream by Mikey, and no one would really care at all...
I still have yet to see Star Trek, but will look at it with an open mind
crikey, if Peter did not like it, peter doesn't like it. No need to have an ongoing narrative as to why he is wrong or what not, or bring up the tmnt. if you liked the movie, wonderful, if you didnt then thats ok too. no need to drag on the point and counterpoints forever. it is what it is, another star trek movie.
in my opinion, being a long time fan of the genre, i really enjoyed it. my GF who hates movies like this, sat completely amused and demanded to watch it again. of course, this movie is far from perfect, but giving the franchise is a reboot like this makes it accessible to everyone not just closet trekkies, which is why it works with so many people. but of course, real fans of the genre will be sad to watch something they grew up with, "changed" and "messed" with. it's as if someone said,, remember this character that you always loved? well FORGET IT! were not doing it that way anymore. so i can completely understand with peter but also let my self take the movie for what it is and enjoy.
there will be more star trek movies, wether or not they follow this universe or the next, we are lucky enough that people still care about it, to feel the need to capture it on film. it's a wonderful genre and because of the new film, will invite a new generation to have a star trek of their own, as we did as children. until next time,... wakka wakka and live long and prosper - Mauro
The BIGGEST problems I have with cartoons in general, is that characters NEVER Change. People don't go through life wearing the same yellow jumpsuit :). Should the guys forever be teenagers and never age, never learn, or change?Actually, they WERE changing in the 2K3 series-- this is what drew me into the show! They started out with "Things Change" and (barring the whole "Lost Season" which I loved but it was rushed-- and I am EVER grateful to Peter Laird for making sure it was made!!)right up to "Ninja Tribunal" there WAS growth and change! I LOVED the continuity! I loved how Leo developed over time-- hell, how they ALL developed over time-- it was sweet!
Then "Fast Forward" and I do NOT fault Mirage for that, just 4Kids-- kind of went backwards! With 2K3 you got the sense that time had passed and the guys were no longer 15 like in the beginning.
I can't speak for others, but I just do not follow the tangents that the Vol. 4 is taking. I'm not against change-- I'd just like my Turtles to be more aware of what the hell is happening to eachother.
I definately agree with some of the above posts about the loss of sense of brotherhood, the whole "outcast" aspect of the turtles being lost, lack of NINJA storyline, ect...Those are core values of the tmnt world that I (and most fans) hold very near and dear...If I had my way, I'd prefer the new reboot end up being a trilogy with the first movie being the first issue, the second being the events from Leo 1 and Return to New York, and then the last being City at War - though, I'd absolutely love to see Utroms and Triceratons make it into the film(s) somewhere down the road...
Anyway, I see Vol. 4 for what it is - an evolving storyline. I know it's leading somewhere and look forward to seeing the result. I've very interested in what's going on with Leo in the current volume...Something strange is definately going on with all of that.
And I've mentioned it before, but regarding the April-roach TMNT issue, that is by far one of the most well-written and enjoyable comics I've ever read...
-r
Splinter's Iroonna >>
Gotta Defend Peter AND 4Kids. Only Playmates wanted Fast Forward. More or less confirmed in a round about way in the 4Kids NYCC panel.
Personally, I think Movie 1 should do something a bit more drastic.
Focus on Hamato Yoshi and Oruko Saki for the first 30 minutes. Really try to explain how they got to where they stood at their final fight. When Yoshi dies, Splinter starts his journey and so does Saki as Shredder.
The second half of the movie could introduce April, Baxter nd the mousers, and leave off the turtles saving April as a cliff hanger for movie 2.
One thing that always surprises me about comic readers in general is how willing they are to just drop things altogether if they don't agree with something. It's like One More Day in Amazing Spiderman. Not many people agreed with it. I did, but felt it was handled less spectacularly than it should have. Regardless, people dropped the book and continued to flame the title without reading what had been going on since, and the hints that had been dropped that it was all going somewhere and that it would all come full circle. I tend to feel the same way about Volume 4.
I can understand people not agreeing with some things happening, and I can understand peoples' arguments regarding April's revelation, but to just drop the book (AND Tales apparently in some cases) and not seemingly base your decisions on a book that has really only just begun to amp up is something I can't get my head around. BUT that's just me. I've been reading comics all my life and have gone through the ups and downs of a lot of books and have just learned to go with the flow because eventually -- especially in comics -- it all comes full circle.
Comics, unless it's a miniseries or something that has a definite ending in sight, are an evolving medium. The story is constantly evolving as each event happens. I would argue that one should at least look into what has come beyond that point that turned them off, just to see what has been done with the story before writing it off completely.
As for the first movie -- I reckon gangs, mousers and a taste of Foot Clan. Set the Foot Clan up for a full on confrontation in the second movie.
Just to be clear, I was speaking in regards to the fan response when I said that was how I felt about Volume 4, not the execution (which was the problem I had with One More Day). I really enjoy it, just wish it came out a little more often (the whole Shredder/Battle Nexus thing always leaves me hungry for more straight away)!
Blogger Neil said...
Splinter's Iroonna >>
Gotta Defend Peter AND 4Kids. Only Playmates wanted Fast Forward. More or less confirmed in a round about way in the 4Kids NYCC panel.Really? I have always been under the impression that 4Kids' Standards and Practices were so freaked out by "Insane in the Membrane" that they pretty much drove the fast forward aspect of "Fast Forward". I shall bow to your (roundabout) expertise.
Cynthia :D
Cynthia, from what I understand, Playmates were a large factor in the Fast Forward direction.
Back to star trek. Saw it this afternoon and it was quite entertaining. However, it definitely did not feel like a star trek film. Having said that I agree it was like "an elseworlds" film. In my opinion, the events in the first scene alter the star trek universe and thus the movie really can't be considered a prequel. It doesn't try to explain anything, it reinvents.
I hear Nine is quite good... passed up a chance for a free screening last week.
Star Trek EPISODE XI :REVENGE OF THE ROMULANS☻ ☺
Sarah The Anime Librarian said...
I am a HUGE DS9 fan, Tokka. I even have a bajoran earring. LOL-->> YAY !! ! ;]
I think there is far too much "apples to oranges" comparing going on here.
If my TMNT: Volume 4 comic book series had begun as a "reboot" of the Mirage TMNT comic book continuity, starting the whole story over, and -- for example -- the following had happened:
-- The Turtles weren't accidentally mutated by alien mutagenic waste, but were actually created through deliberate genetic experimentation in a government lab
-- Splinter was a ferret, not a rat, and he had martial arts skills not because he had watched his master Hamato Yoshi in the dojo but instead because he was a reincarnated ninja master
-- the Turtles weren't found in the sewer by Splinter, but instead were discovered by him when he staged a PETA-like raid on an animal testing facility
-- The Shredder was actually a psychotic "secret identity" of a NYC politician, and there was no Foot Clan
-- Casey Jones was the latest in a long line of costumed vigilantes in the Jones family, carrying on his forefathers' proud tradition
-- April O'Neil was Casey's married sister
... then I could see the validity in comparing the TMNT apples to the "Star Trek" oranges. As it stands, I think these comparisons are specious. -- PL
PL said...
I think there is far too much "apples to oranges" comparing going on here. Peter, not to belabor the point, but I don't think we were talking specific plot points, at least I certainly wasn't. I was talking about fans' reactions to seeming changes in beloved characters.
The point was, you had a very emotional reaction to perceived differences in characters and (I think) the overall tone of the film compared to the older Star Treks. Some TMNT fans have experienced the exact same kind of emotional response to alterations in their beloved characters and the general feelings elicited.
~Donna
-->> What is 'specious' mean ??
specious adj.
1. Having the ring of truth or plausibility but actually fallacious: a specious argument.
2. Deceptively attractive.
-->> .. o good good.
I don't know if i could see Splinter as a ferret.
(( However i still see Mike Dooney's Turtle as a Klingon action figure that never got made in my mind .
DAMM YOU PARAMOUNT !! !! ))
.. >v<
I agree with Peter that this isn't quite apples to apples with the comparison. At all.
It just seems like a lot of people with a lot of concerns/disappointment about the direction of the TMNT in the children's spinoff universes (hey, lump me in there, too, I think the Playmates thing has always been a deal with the Devil in many respects... forever keeping TMNT in the mainstream behind a glass ceiling that prevents it from reaching Mirage-level greatness -- that last movie was toddler-pandering ass) and even the way Vol. 4 has gone are using your opinion about the Star Trek reboot as a kind of "Gotcha!" opportunity to voice their grievances.
(and you see what I did there? I cleverly hid my own grievances to you in the above paragraph)
Whether there's validity behind these complaints or not... it's just not a valid comparison people are making here to begin with.
- Andrew Modeen
Peter, I think the fact is that Star Trek in it's past form isn't exciting or relevant to today's audiences (sans-trekkies), and a reboot was necessary.
I was a casual ST fan growing up, but I thought this film was amazingly entertaining, and when it comes down to it, thats what it needed to be. And the fact that it created an alternative future, it still leaves the possibility of stories being told there.
I think a lot of ST fans saw this expecting something nostalgic, like being a fan of Adam West's Batman and seeing Batman Begins.
devilbanex said...
It just seems like a lot of people with a lot of concerns/disappointment about the direction of the TMNT ...has gone, are using your opinion about the Star Trek reboot as a kind of "Gotcha!" opportunity to voice their grievances.Heh, well, "Gotcha opportunity" makes it sound like there was hostile intent, and nothing could be further from the truth. I did see an opportunity to hopefully make some my (and other fans') concerns understood through a shared Fan Experience.
"Peter, I think the fact is that Star Trek in it's past form isn't exciting or relevant to today's audiences (sans-trekkies), and a reboot was necessary."
Horseshit.
Star Trek has managed to exist for 60 years from one incarnation to the next without any reboots or such. How do you know there wasn't a way for TPTB to do a reboot in such a way that we could have our cake and eat it too (preserve all the history, but start anew in a crowd-pleasing/accessible enough way)? It's just pretty short-sighted (or at least imagination-deprived) of anyone to suggest that this is the ONLY way a Trek relaunch could happen successfully.
And despite the spin the media seems to be putting out, Star Trek was never in dire straits... Enterprise's ratings were not at cancellation numbers and were actually very consistant and strong pretty much to the end... they just weren't getting any better, either, and the show didn't fit into UPN's then-strategy ("OK, we can do an episode of Moesha at $10,000 an episode versus $2,000,000 an episode for Enterprise at only slightly better ratings..."). That's Enterprise.
The movies... OK, it's really quite simple. The last two Star Trek movies were HORRIBLE. I mean, TERRIBLE. But it's not TNG or the 24th century's fault or continuity that's the problem... the problem is truly horrific, hackneyed, and unremarkable scripts coupled and lifeless direction. The last TNG movie that was good was First Contact, and people DID turn out to see that... in fact, depending on where you go for your box office numbers it remains the HIGHEST grossing Trek film of all time -- and this is a TNG film.
Proof that the solution has always been very simple: make a Trek movie that doesn't suck... people will turn out and see it. No reboot, no Kirk and Spock needed, no quasi-Mirror Universes or erasing/rewriting of 50 years of history needed.
Going back to Kirk and Spock just seems pretty creatively bankrupt (and doing a young Kirk and Spock that aren't really Kirk and Spock... puzzling). And now I'm even reading interviews that say that Abrams and company want to start redoing Khan and other stories in this new Abramsverse... god forbid they attempt to do anything new or original.
- Andrew Modeen
Like GW said, I didn't post any of my comments here as a way of finding an in for a personal attack. When I read what Peter had to say about the new Star Trek movie, it just seemed ironic to me, because he was basically voicing the same type of complaints that many of the TMNT fans have had for quite a while now. And in my opinion, it IS a valid comparison when you really look at what he's complaining about. He doesn't like the changes that were made to the characters or their universe, and that's basically the same thing some of us have an issue with. I've already listed many of my own personal issues with the new comic in one of my comments above. It DOES compare, because it's basically the exact same thing. Neither Star Trek nor TMNT has discounted what happened in the past (from what I'm told about the Star Trek movie, anyway), but the present of both stories is very, very different from what it once was. Change is fine...it's good in fact, but not when you take something that once had heart and relatability and a recurring overall theme that really spoke to people, and then strip it all away. It sounds to me that this is Peter's opinion of the new Star Trek movie (or at least close to what he was trying to say), and the fact is that many of us felt that he'd essentially done the same thing with the characters we've known and loved for years and years.
My whole point in responding at all was that I was hoping that since he now had a way to relate in this way to his fans, maybe he would be open to listening to us instead of just dismissing our concerns with an "If you don't like it, don't read it" kind of response.
60 Years? Really?
I think the Onion's satirical video called "Trekkies Bash Star Trek for being fun; enjoyable" is so true.
Does it really matter if characters were different and histories were changed? They made this movie for everyone, not just one group of people.
"I think the Onion's satirical video called "Trekkies Bash Star Trek for being fun; enjoyable" is so true."
Those people deserve ball cancer for that video.
"Does it really matter if characters were different and histories were changed? They made this movie for everyone, not just one group of people."
As I said above, it's just pretty short-sighted (or at least imagination-deprived) of anyone to suggest that this is the ONLY way a Trek relaunch could happen successfully.
There are plenty of ways to do a relaunch of Star Trek without setting the clock back to 0 or smashing the old clock to smithereens.
- Andrew Modeen
I really don't see what the big deal is, Peter Laird disliked the latest Star Trek movie, so what, what does that have to do with TMNT? Given how fans cling to vastly different versions of the turtles, you would think people would be used to the bashings and disagreements by now.
This is interesting to me on two counts; one, because this is literally the first negative thing I've read about this film, be it from critics, casual goers, or hardcore trek fans. Everyone has only praise for this film; you are the first one I've seen to give it a negative review. And two, because when it comes to TMNT, you are "Paramount," and we fans are feeling the same way about recent TMNT endeavors as you say you're feeling about this film.
And yikes... just read the comments and saw that I echoed almost exactly what's already been said, particularly by Dawn and Chris.
AM :The movies... OK, it's really quite simple. The last two Star Trek movies were HORRIBLE. I mean, TERRIBLE. But it's not TNG or the 24th century's fault or continuity that's the problem... the problem is truly horrific, hackneyed, and unremarkable scripts coupled and lifeless direction. The last TNG movie that was good was First Contact, and people DID turn out to see that... in fact, depending on where you go for your box office numbers it remains the HIGHEST grossing Trek film of all time -- and this is a TNG film-->> Thanks, A.M. for at least daring (perhaps inadvertently .. still ) for slightly touching upon my initial question.
DAWN:.. He doesn't like the changes that were made to the characters or their universe, and that's basically the same thing some of us have an issue with. I've already listed many of my own personal issues with the new comic in one of my comments above. It DOES compare, because it's basically the exact same thing.-->> .. from a certain point of view i gues it does. I'm not sure i agree with your points. i am trying to see thru' the apples and oranges. Guess i'm not there yet. (( Wait are you ' MY friend ,DAWN '.. the one i know.. or a different one ?! ))
There are stories coming out and stories i am seeing very much in tune to the original volume of TMNT .. particularly in TALES - .. and some incredibly too cool for words.
Trying to see as many sides of the debate as i can ( like usual ) .. it's kinda hard as i've not seen the film in question yet.
Then again .. : Apples and oranges and fruit salad.>v<
::waves at Tokka:: Yes, it's me. :)
And I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I did want to address Tristan's comment about people just dropping a comic book when they don't agree with something.
I've been a Turtle fan for 20 years (wow, that makes me feel old!). I've been watching and reading since I was 14. Along the way there have been things I didn't always agree with, or a time or two when things rubbed me the wrong way. But I didn't just leave, because there were also many redeeming factors, and the Turtles were still the Turtles I knew and loved.
I'm what you'd call a die-hard fan. I've collected practically everything TMNT ever made. Despite certain cheese factors, I enjoyed pretty much every "universe" of the TMNT. I was first in line for all 4 of the movies. Heck, in high school, my friend and I were known as "The Turtle Girls", and we had days when we'd dress up from head to toe in Turtle stuff. This is how far my geekdom goes for these guys. This is why it's so sad to me to no longer feel connected to the franchise.
The reason I stopped reading volume 4 was due to a culmination of things. There are so many I could list here, but I've already touched on a few, and I really don't want this to turn into a total bash fest. But eventually, I decided to take Peter's own advice and just stop reading it. It was upsetting me too much, because for me personally, it really wasn't the TMNT anymore. Nothing about it feels the same.
I don't really see the point in spending my hard earned money on something I don't enjoy reading. Believe me, I hung in there as long as I could, but eventually enough was enough.
-->> o' o !! O'Dawn ..
well about TALES - ?!
Side - step volume 4.
If you aren't reading that .. then i challenge you to do so.
The diverse stories are getting exciting all the time.
Some striking the hard edged core ( at least in my apples and oranges of opinion ) and a little beyond like Mr. Jone's and companies ' run on stories.
I also recall this year , Andrew Bonia's and LeFevre'a 'Fugitoid' story.
It was actually very striking , charming and touching.
And brought back to me allot of the wonder of the classic TMNT sci-fi stories that are so important ( it was actually pretty relatable ..but that's another issue. ).
Anyway, i do wonder where you are with that book !!
-->> ..sorry for the Typos , Dawn .. i'm 1/2 wake again.
I was about to comment on how Vol. 4 isn't as far-out as people say it is, but then I skimmed thru the comments and was reminded of the dinosaur mutation and a bunch of memories came crashing back. It's been a while since I've read those issues... yeah, a lot of it has been hard to swallow, and I find it hard to understand how Pete can't see that side of the argument given his feelings for something he's close to. But to be fair (and to post a bit of what I was originally going to say), I still buy the book, though I've only read up to about issue 20 (picked up issue 28 and a couple others in the dollar bin yesterday). Truthfully, I can't say that I don't have fun reading it. A lot of it could anger me, but I just try to toss it to the wind and take it for what it is: 15 minutes of escapism and some sweet Lawson art. But that aside, yes, Vol. 4 does not feel like TMNT at all - so much of what fans love has been messed with, and that's the bottom line that people seem to be saying here. And I'd hardly call the feelings of fans unsound simply because they don't adhere to a certain set of standards. No disrespect to anyone, but that's the specious argument, if you ask me.
I've never really followed Star Trek, although, my dad and uncle are huge fans, so I heard things about it here and there. I have no interest in seeing the film even though it got mixed reviews. But, where TMNT is concerned, the die-hard fans (I'm also in that category being a fan of 20+ years) are unable to accept changes compared to what they grew up with. I realize change could be good, but that's not always the case with everything. What Dawn was pointing out here is that you didn't agree with the new Star Trek. Well, in honesty, a lot of fans don't really agree with the new TMNT. Some will remain with it due to enjoying it, and that's great. That's how they feel about it. I remain with the fandom because I love the characters very much, also love the many friends I've made throughout the years. But, some of it is not to my full liking. Doesn't mean I hate it and will drop it completely from my life, it just means I don't agree with some of it. At the moment I'm devoting a lot of my time to another fandom, but, I know I'll always be a fan of the Turtles.
Alex ::"But that aside, yes, Vol. 4 does not feel like TMNT at all - .. -->> ..as opposed to what pinnacle of your opinion is TMNT ' supposed to feel like '
..
..so much of what fans love has been messed with, ..-->> ..so fans like myself capable of enjoying variations on the theme are chopped liver ..
wait what ?!
and that's the bottom line that people seem to be saying here.-->> ..mmmmmm..
And I'd hardly call the feelings of fans unsound simply because they don't adhere to a certain set of standards.-->> .. fruit salad ..
No disrespect to anyone, ..-->> ..and none meant to you.. you know how much i respect you and your work so .. - -
but that's the specious argument, if you ask me.-->> ..ok .. but some form of something um ' SPECIOUS ' regarding this topic or topics similar at least have existed in some form or another.
This is just another form.
As many detractors as say Volume four .. there were just as many, more or less for the Third volume.
This argument will take other forms and variations in the future regarding volumes and / or story linese. The tone may be more or lesser depending on the support i guess.
Does seem what gets overlooked are those of the opinion that are actually enjoying the story.
..
;'
"deep sense of family?"
Nothing wrong if the turtles are not living together.
Just because you leave your house doesn´t mean your family is not going to be your family anymore.
And because they r in different places that doesn´t mean they r going to stay like that forever.
Yes, it´s a little weird to see the turtles walking down the street like if they were human...
More foot ninjas? Since vol. 1 we have read issues without the foot, so the foot clan doesn´t need to be in all the issues.
The rapha´s mutation... well... the vampire thing... wel...
Ups and downs? Yes, like any comics books.
Would i change some things? Yes.
Would i keep some things? Yes.
Still i like vol. 4.
So "Crisis" strikes again....
Thank you for sharing your opinion Pete, I have heard mixed things about it and when I get the chance to see it I'll know what I'm possibly getting into.
And I don't see the need to compare TMNT to Trek.
To different entities. And while I don't like every plot device, I'm not going to bash the book. I want to read the entire finished story one day, in one sitting. Then and only then, do I believe I can say I liked it or disliked it.
Judging something that's not done yet, and Pete's story is not done yet, is like walking into the movie watching five to ten minutes and then walking out.
I mean come on people, This isn't that God awful Catwoman film that was released and I was instantly pissed...That was Catwoman in Name only... Hmmm...
I'm taking a shot in the dark here, but from all the reviews of "fans" I've heard it tends to be folks who are much more casual fans.
Those casual fans seem to love the new movie because it's not really Star Trek (Which is mostly boring bridge scenes IMO) and the new exciting version has people excited.
I don't think you have to worry too much about many sequels though. In today's climate no one wants to be typecast as Captain Kirk or Mr. Spock. If they do another movie good for them, but we won't get more than a trilogy as best.
Oh and I love Volume 4 for what it's worth. I think it has gotten a little heavy handed at times and the April story took me off guard but I didn't find any irreparable to the characters.
There are already no less than three TMNT continuities out there for folks to follow. April doesn't have to be human in all of them.
When Jim Lee took over the turtles he wanted to do his own thing and fans went crazy. We see the same sort of reaction to some of the Vol 4 stuff, because I hink fans tend to want a TMNT comic that's not possible.
I absolutely am one of those people who would love to see the TMNT comics that are more Foot versus Turtles, but the TMNT franchise has always been playing catch up in that sense. The Shredder was killed in the FIRST book and no matter what fans want you can't really put that genie back in the bottle.
It'd be wonderful to have a TMNT reboot that fixed some of the errors and had Shredder alive for a few years just so we could get a more epic Foot versus TMNT storyline, but at the end of the day it is what it is and I enjoy it for that.
Perfect? Nope, but what is?
NG: .. When Jim Lee took over the turtles he wanted to do his own thing and fans went crazy. We see the same sort of reaction to some of the Vol 4 stuff, because I hink fans tend to want a TMNT comic that's not possible .. **
-->> But Newt, he didn't ' Take them over ' per se.
That was a special arrangement ( and with Erik Larsen ) to sell toys.
o gee.
>v<
"(Which is mostly boring bridge scenes IMO)"
How about we find you a bridge to take a walk off of?
-->> A.M. !! !! !! !!
CALM DOWN !! !! !! !! !! ..
Get along , Gang !! !!
I never cared for Star Trek, but I've already seen this new one twice! I loved it! I laughed at all the funny spots. Kudos to everyone involved.
Tokka -->> ..as opposed to what pinnacle of your opinion is TMNT ' supposed to feel like '
..
..-->> ..so fans like myself capable of enjoying variations on the theme are chopped liver ..Not sure what happened here, my friend... either I missed your point, or you missed mine. I did clearly say that I have fun reading Vol. 4, and even when I don't agree, I just look past it and try to get a fun 15 minutes out of it. And I too am very capable of enjoying variations on the theme (though, I don't know if an in continuity book that is to be taken as canon should be considered a variation). So if you're chopped liver, I am too :)
Lord Nightwalker: And I don't see the need to compare TMNT to Trek. I don't think that was the comparison, or at least it wasn't intended to be (not by me, anyway). The comparison is Pete's feelings for ST and his desire to see what he loves not get messed with, and TMNT fan feelings for the Turtles, and their desire to see what they love not get messed with. Seems like an even playing field to me.
ALEX Toon ::
..
..Not sure what happened here, my friend... either I missed your point, or you missed mine. I did clearly say that I have fun reading Vol. 4, and even when I don't agree, I just look past it and try to get a fun 15 minutes out of it. And I too am very capable of enjoying variations on the theme (though, I don't know if an in continuity book that is to be taken as canon should be considered a variation). So if you're chopped liver, I am too :) -->> ..meh i'll just come up with an excuse and chalk it up to my exhausted mind. ( And again ..tired or not those points were made with initial respect for ya anyways. ).
Ok .. i guess i'll crack out the Dijon mustard ,curry and apple sauce, with a side of freek'm FRIES to serve up with us ' Chopped Liver ' Turtle Fans ..
;p
That sounds good!
With all due respect to the opinons of those like Dawn and Greenwillow, I have to note something here.
I think maybe another apples to oranges part of this is the influance of the original creators.
As I said I liked this Start trek film, but to me it didn’t feel like something Gene Roddenberry would have done with it. Which is in my opinion, a valid complaint some folks have had. On the other hand, Peter is the guy who made the turtles. If he decided to re-boot it with Splinter as a kung fu panda, and the turtles as rappers, you may think its stupid, and would have every right to not want to read the book anymore. But its HIS baby. He made it; he (and his and those that worked on the book of course) put the blood sweat in tears for it. He has every right in the world to do whatever he likes with it. It may upset some fans, and that’s ok. Those fans have a right to be upset, or say they don’t like it. However, I have issue with someone who would say he didn’t have the right to do that. His stuff, his right.
The fact that Roddenberry is dead, and can’t weigh in on this, leaves it up to limbo if he would have approved. I suspect he wouldn’t have, but what if he did? If he had been here to say “Great Job, JJ, and next time we’re going to make Kirk turn into a Alien Ninja Elephant”. I would have groaned pretty loud, but its still would have been his to change.
I understand that the fans have a lot invested in their fandom. I do too. But at the end of the day, its only as much ours as we make it. No more. Most creators don’t create for the fans. They can’t. If they did, it would be a mess. They create what they want, and if you decide to go for the ride, it’s your choice.
I get what you're saying, Sarah, and I agree about the fact that Peter did co-create the Turtles. I never said he didn't have the "right" to do what he wanted, only that I'm not on board with all the drastic changes. It certainly is my choice whether or not I want to read it, which is why (as I've said earlier) I have chosen not to spend my time or money.
I do agree that Peter has the right to do what he wants with his own characters. I just wish that he would have left something of the original characters and plotlines in there somewhere. My main point in this has always been just trying to get him to see that his feelings of "everything has changed in this fandom and I don't like that" is how many of his fans feel about his creation as well. I know he's had to deal with several complaints in the past, and I was hoping that his feelings on Star Trek would help him understand how his own fans feel and why they've been voicing such complaints.
FINALLY got this to post right. LOL.
Gotcha Dawn, and I didn’t mean that you personally have held that opinion. But some folks that have had issue with the changes have held the opinion that he hasn’t got the right.
My main point being that there really isn’t a comparison between the two as Gene is dead and had no say, where Peter is not and the changes are in line with what he's chosen to his own property. That’s a huge difference I think, and it makes the comparison between how some folks feel about this Star Trek Movie, and Some feel about the new direction turtles have gone, not really compatible.
You're doing what any reasonable fan should when they don't like the way a property is heading...you're not spending your money on it.
I’ve never felt that Peter doesn’t understand where the fans that don’t like it are coming from. But as a creator, I believe he has taken his property where he feels the stories should go. Agree or disagree, I think that the idea that he is somehow disengaged with the fandom’s feelings (on many sides) is silly. People have made what they think clear. I believe Peter respects that, I just think he’s gone where he needs to go with his creations. I don’t believe the comparison is fair, because it implies he didn’t get that some people were disenchanted with the changes. Bollocks to that!
And let’s not loose sight of the fact that no fandom is a solid force opinion. It seems that some folks here that are unhappy with how the TMNT books have gone feel that ALL fans are with them.
Obviously, that’s not the case at all. I'm sure you've all guessed that I have no problem with how the 4th volume has gone. I find it fresh and interesting.
Some people are happy with the changes, I think quite a few have found it interesting and fresh.
It isn’t as if Peter is sitting cackling and rubbing his hands, trying to think of new ways to piss the fans off, while droves of fans beat at the door begging him to go back to the way things were. There's a vast diversity of opinions on the new books. Positive and Negative both. And much in between.
Perhaps JJ is not aware of the trekkies feelings. But then this was not a movie made for trekkies.
IMNSHO
And for the record, TMNT fan for 21 years, so we're in the same boat Dawn! :P
See Charlie X episode 106
it was hinted that Uhura had "something" for Spock,
From what I've read, the main cast of the new "Star Trek" movie has been signed for at least two sequels, and I believe I read (or heard in a radio interview) that J.J. Abrams is interested in directing at least one more "Star Trek". Assuming that is true, I believe it is safe to assume that the next few "Star Trek" movies will follow in the footsteps of this first one, and it seems very likely that all "Star Trek" from this day forward will fall into this new continuity.
And if THAT is true, then what Abrams has done is essentially wipe away pretty nearly ALL of pre-existing "Star Trek" continuity and history (except, I suppose, that established by the last "Star Trek" TV series, "Enterprise", as those stories took place before the days of Kirk and Spock), including the original "Star Trek" series, "Star Trek: The Next Generation", "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine", "Star Trek: Voyager", and all of the previous "Star Trek" movies -- I think it adds up to something between 300 and 400 hours of stories (and that's if you're just counting TV shows and movies).
Now, given all that, please tell me -- what changes have I wrought with the Mirage TMNT comic book universe that even BEGIN to approach what Abrams did with/to the universe of "Star Trek"? I'm really curious. -- PL
Why are you so angry with Abrams when he didn't write the movie, he only directed it? Of course the next movie(s) is going to follow in the path of this one; why wouldn't it when this one has been critically and monetarily successful? This would be likely with or without Abrams.
All of the TV shows still happened, so there's nothing to really be upset about. The application of time travel in this movie is slightly different from how it has traditionally been handled in other Star Trek and general sci-fi ventures. It seems like that may be throwing you off. Seeing how time travel is completely fictional anyways, going with the flow is just a lot more fun.
As much as I dislike the direction the comics have taken in recent years (and the entire franchise, frankly), mostly I just wish it seemed like you cared about what fans were saying to you. All I ever see is you dismissing any and all criticism received. Even here, you're too busy being defensive to even consider that maybe, just maybe, someone is presenting to you a pretty good and completely relevant point. The simple fact that this topic has had more comments and discussion than anything else you've posted in a good, long while should at least tell you there's some element of truth to what is being said.
You have no problem criticizing Abrams and Star Trek or George Lucas and Star Wars, but you can't stand it that people dare say you've messed up Ninja Turtles. In the end, Lucas listened to fans about Jar Jar and to my knowledge didn't take any of the hate for the character or claims he destroyed people's childhoods personally. If he did, he refrained from taking it out on anyone publicly.
Anyways, it sounds to me like you should just take your own advice and no longer go see Star Trek movies. Personally, I would be overjoyed to see a TMNT movie as good and fun as the new Trek. But what do I know, right?
Peter-- I wasn't intending to compare the extent of the changes between the past and present of either story line. I agree with you *entirely* when you say comparing changes to the Star Trek Universe in this new movie and the TMNT storyline is apples and oranges. It's two completely different things.
The only comparison I wanted to make was between your reaction to the Star Trek changes and some of our reactions to the Vol 4 changes. I was only trying to point out how as fans we (SOME of the "we"!) have gone through the same hair-tearing, breast-beating, anguished cries of "OH NOES!" that some Trek fans have had in response to this film. (I do hope my attempt at humor is coming through here...It's so hard with only print to work with...)
Fans are a weird breed. We get very emotional and very attached to our fandoms.
There's some stuff I personally would have liked to have seen happen differently in Vol 4 but I am *very* aware that it's not my book, it's not my baby and all I can do is whimper and sulk. Which is unpleasant for all concerned and I probably won't keep it up for very long. ;o)
I will promise you though, that when I do get my funky little web comic launched I will come begging and pleading to you for critique and I promise I will not flinch if you slice and dice. Fair is fair.
And no matter what, I will always love your little green guys. Where ever they end up.
~Donna
While I understand your basic point, Peter, could you please give some examples of what was so objectionable? As someone who knows or cares very little about the Trek franchise and who hasn't seen the movie (which I realize probably places me outside this post's intended audience) your basic review is vague in the extreme. Are the difference between this and the previous Trek factual (continuity, established history or character), or more thematic? What exactly do you consider to be the soul of the francise, and how is it not presented here? Why is Spock making out with Uhura wrong? Some elaboration would be appreciated. Thank you!
~Ian
Ian said...
...Why is Spock making out with Uhura wrong? Just an interesting factoid I only recently learned. That famous kiss between Kirk and Uhura in the original Star Trek series was apparently the first ever interracial kiss seen on TV.
The History Channel recently aired "How William Shatner Changed the World", a really fun summation of all the technology inspired by the Star Trek series.
Peter-- (and anyone one else fond of tech stuff) if you missed it I highly recommend looking for it. They're bound to show it again.
Link--> http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&showId=173418
..Now, given all that, please tell me -- what changes have I wrought with the Mirage TMNT comic book universe that even BEGIN to approach what Abrams did with/to the universe of "Star Trek"? I'm really curious.
// //
//
-->> Dunno know if i can come close to touching this to a level people would understand.
I'll try with this example. :
Carlson and Fosco's Volume three has been cast as ' NON - CANNON ' to the Mirage TMNT.
I didn't quite understand this at the time so Dan described it to me as Carlson's storyline existing in a different 'Universe' ( timeline ?! ) compared to the main Mirage Universe.
I spect' the same for TMNTA, TMNT movies and animated universes follow their own tangents though on a different degree.
While the Image run on Turtles remains still filled with mixed reactions. I'm one of those that went along for the incredibly fast paced ride and enjoyed every minute of it. Carlson himself stated that he intended to bring things back about to a ' normal' level had it all not ended prematurely. What is done is done.
Canon or not, i'd always imagined Renet could have swept in there at any time and have set things right. And here were are now.
So .. well.
' PUCKER UP , Uhura !! ' ♥ ♥
//
One Good thing about volume four.
Mike and the Regenta had an adult relationship that's turning out rather tragic.
I like this part of Pete's plot allot.
Rose:: In the end, Lucas listened to fans about Jar Jar and to my knowledge didn't take any of the hate for the character or claims he destroyed people's childhoods personally. If he did, he refrained from taking it out on anyone publicly. // //
//
-->> ..i still love Jar Jar .. ten years later !!
Okeyday ..
♥ ♥
^_^ **
Hey Rose,
I found a lot of what you said very interesting. Particularly this:
I just wish it seemed like you cared about what fans were saying to you. All I ever see is you dismissing any and all criticism received. Even here, you're too busy being defensive to even consider that maybe, just maybe, someone is presenting to you a pretty good and completely relevant point.Going back to my earlier points, how exactly do you want peter to respond to the critique of fans. I have always read his responses as not disrespecting the fans, but disagreeing.
I'm going to assume that you don't mean that he should simply say "Well if that's what the fans want, then that's what I'm going to give them." Frankly, if that's why "Respecting" means, than I think we see right there why so much of fandom in my opinion goes wrong. As I pointed out earlier, creators don;t create for the fandom. They do what they feel they need to do for their own work, and the fandom either goes with it, or does as Dawn and some others ave done- stop buying the franchise. (in my opinion a responsible and adult reaction to disagreeing with a creator).
To expect a creator to just do whatever a fandom wants is unreasonable, rather juvenile, and (on a personal note) huge reason why George Lucas lost a lot of respect from me personally.
But I digress. Lets say Peter is NOT going to change what he did with the books. How would you suggest he show respect for fans while still disagreeing with the opinions of the folks who want him to do something he's not.
As a creator myself, I find this whole thread of thought interesting. I'm very interested to learn your thoughts on that issue. I'll be teaching some classes at my library this summer for kids as writers, and I think this will be something we need to touch on.
I'd like to hear from ANYONE here who feels Peter's disrespected the fandom as well. How do you think he could disagree but still respect the unhappy fans?
Maybe if the complaints where worded different?
'Uhura Beds spock!'
'Continuity Destroyed!'
'Series and History changed!'
'Mikey has an affair with alien royalty!'
'Aliens on Earth!'
'Turtles are no longer ninjas!'
It's not so much that people are comparing the changes in star trek to turtles, but using your displeasure with the star trek franchise to illustrate how fans feel about the way the turtles franchise is going.
This new movie could be the perfect jumping ground to really bring the turtles into the 21st century.
- Give them all red Bandana's.
- Tone down Mikey's dumb personality and make it closer to intelligence with the others
- let the turtles injure people with their weapons, but stop short of killing
- Show the history of Shredder/Saki and Saki as a business man. Take the character of Shredder seriously rather than as an excuse to sell more toys, or remind people of the 'Wretched Reptiles' version that has permeated the public mind.
You've got one of the people who helped create the great Batman Begins franchise....he could help do the same for the Turtles.
For example, how cool would live action Elite Ninja look? Or Leatherhead? Let alone Mousers (which should not be CGI if possible)
Excellent points Neil.
However, you're back to the "Change it to how we want it" argument. What I'm interested in is how fans want to be addressed to be respected when a creator is saying "Look, this is my thing and I've chosen to do this with it." How do you best show that you've heard what fans are saying, respect their feelings, but go in a different direction anyway.
I have some selfish reasons for being interested in this. I am planning a book on the nature of fandoms, both positive and negative angles.
It's not "change it how we want it", it's "can you at least understand NOW how we feel?"
And evidently the answer is "no".
No one has ever demanded change. They've expressed dissatisfaction with the changes made, just like Peter Laird has expressed his own opinions of what has happened with the new Star Trek.
Empathy. Just a tiny smidge of empathy.
Cynthia
BTW,
Saw star Trek, loved it. I ws expecting to see some uhura spock love moments based on comments read online, thankfully none of that was present.
Just a fun, great action movie. And JJ Abrams is right. Original Trek had no money to do this, so they substituted with boring bridge scenes.....
This is Trek for the 21st century, open to everyone and not just basement dwelling trekkies :)
Fair enough Cynthia, but how do you suggest he do that? How do you feel he hasn't done that? That's the question I'm interested in.
How does he show respect for how the dissatisfied fans feel and yet still disagree and do what he feels he has to with his own creations?
The whole point it seems of folks pointing out that how he feels Star Trek was i the same as how you and other fans like you feel about turtles is perhaps a fair comparison. But it suggests that you feel he doesn't have respect for that. I want to know why people feel like that?
Another question I have to ask, is what do you gain pointing it out on the blog? What are you looking for?
I can think of a list of possibilities. Some need to show you (Collectively, not you personally Cynthia) are right and he is wrong, the hope for some kind of apology, a kind of "Ah ha! Gotcha!" Gleefulness. Maybe Some hope of common ground between your point of view about the turtles and his, and several others I won't list because I've spoken of them before.
I'm extremely interested in this. Its very similar to some aspects of fandom I've experienced over the years working/heading guest relations for many conventions.
Sarah--
To the best of my knowledge, no one is looking for an apology, or an admission of being "wrong" about anything
.
The only thing we (and I'm pretty sure I'm speaking for a few people here) would like to see is that we've been understood. Several of us have repeatedly said that we are not comparing recent changes in the TMNT to changes in the Star Trek mythos. The point that I, and several others, are trying to make is that there is a commonality between Peter, as a fan of Star Trek, and us, as Turtle fans and that we share some common feelings toward our fandoms. All I'd like is to know he "heard" that, and that he understands what we are saying. There's no "gotcha" to it. It's just an invitation to step outside our emotional responses to our fandoms and to recognize that we share a common experience.
On another note, I'm really intrigued by the subject matter of your book, Sarah. Coming from a background in psychology myself, plus having been deeply involved in this fandom and seen it touch so many aspects of my and others' lives, the topic sounds really interesting
~Donna
"roseangelo said...
Why are you so angry with Abrams when he didn't write the movie, he only directed it? Of course the next movie(s) is going to follow in the path of this one; why wouldn't it when this one has been critically and monetarily successful? This would be likely with or without Abrams."
I know from past experience that you are not shy about displaying your ofttimes epic cluelessness to all and sundry, but this is extreme even for you. Do you REALLY not understand that the director of a movie is the single person most responsible for what appears on the screen? Do you seriously believe that J.J. Abrams just took what the writers wrote and filmed it, without a lot of his own input on plot, concepts, dialogue, etc.?"All of the TV shows still happened, so there's nothing to really be upset about. The application of time travel in this movie is slightly different from how it has traditionally been handled in other Star Trek and general sci-fi ventures. It seems like that may be throwing you off. Seeing how time travel is completely fictional anyways, going with the flow is just a lot more fun."
I'm fine with time travel stories. I generally like time travel stories. I've read many time travel stories, and seen many in films and TV shows. Time travel, when done right, can be a great thing. As it is used in this new "Star Trek" movie, it is not a great thing. It's a weak excuse for running roughshod over forty years of "Star Trek" history. I could almost tolerate it if what replaced the original continuity was as good or better than what came before. In my opinion, what Abrams et al did falls far short of that mark."As much as I dislike the direction the comics have taken in recent years (and the entire franchise, frankly), mostly I just wish it seemed like you cared about what fans were saying to you. All I ever see is you dismissing any and all criticism received."
Then you are not paying attention. "Even here, you're too busy being defensive to even consider that maybe, just maybe, someone is presenting to you a pretty good and completely relevant point. The simple fact that this topic has had more comments and discussion than anything else you've posted in a good, long while should at least tell you there's some element of truth to what is being said."
Holy cow! A post criticizing a very popular revival of a franchise beloved by millions for the last forty years has provoked more discussion that other posts about old Turtle art or motorcycles! Alert the media!"You have no problem criticizing Abrams and Star Trek or George Lucas and Star Wars, but you can't stand it that people dare say you've messed up Ninja Turtles. In the end, Lucas listened to fans about Jar Jar and to my knowledge didn't take any of the hate for the character or claims he destroyed people's childhoods personally. If he did, he refrained from taking it out on anyone publicly."
I'm not entirely sure what point you are trying to make with that gibberish ("take any of the hate"...???). It is true that I don't particularly like hearing people opine that I've messed up the TMNT... but I like it even less when that criticism is based on spurious arguments."Anyways, it sounds to me like you should just take your own advice and no longer go see Star Trek movies. Personally, I would be overjoyed to see a TMNT movie as good and fun as the new Trek. But what do I know, right?"
It's obvious that last comment is the classic rhetorical flourish intended to simultaneously make one appear modestly self-deprecating while implying strongly that one really does know far more than those at whom the comment is directed, but I'm going to take this opportunity to treat it as an actual, sincere question.. and my answer would be "Nowhere near as much as you THINK you know." -- PL
My apologies for the weird formatting in the previous post -- I tried to get it to look right several times, but for whatever reason, I couldn't. -- PL
Wow, I think that's the most arrogant blogger response I've ever read.
I really wish you would have let us work out our differences last year, Peter. It would make things easier for both us.
All your last post proved is that you still hate me. I didn't expect any different, so that's fine. For the sake of the conversation perhaps you could address Donna's most recent post.
I'm still open for reconciliation (agree to disagree) between the two of us if you ever change your mind. Or if you seriously want to continue this argument I'll gladly take it private.
Greased Egg said...
Wow, I think that's the most arrogant blogger response I've ever read.**
//
-->> ..there's more to this issue and it's history than just some ' arrogant blogger response '
..and the persons mainly involved in it.
It's not so black and white . -
Sarah The Anime Librarian said...
Fair enough Cynthia, but how do you suggest he do that? How do you feel he hasn't done that? That's the question I'm interested in.
How does he show respect for how the dissatisfied fans feel and yet still disagree and do what he feels he has to with his own creations?Apparently he does it by tearing into Roseangelo.
And so, I shall walk away from this particular topic, and simply look forward to Comic-Con, where I can meet the man in person.
Cynthia
"roseangelo said...
I really wish you would have let us work out our differences last year, Peter. It would make things easier for both us."
I agree. However, if you recall, you killed that communication with your "I DO NOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO PUBLISH THIS LETTER" line in your April 15, 2008 email to me. I was not willing to continue an email discussion with you under that constraint (which seemed --and still seems -- ridiculous given that the subject at issue was a comic book letters page editorial which dealt with YOUR web-published commentary)."All your last post proved is that you still hate me."
I don't hate you, Rose. Really, I don't. I mean, we don't even KNOW each other, and I consider that a minimum prerequisite for HATING someone.
I just find much of what you write online about me and what I've done/am doing with the TMNT to be ill-considered and insulting. And it really doesn't help that you have this ludicrously partisan "Kevin Eastman is AWESOME and can do no wrong" attitude, which certainly shades your comments."I didn't expect any different, so that's fine."
Given that -- plus the fact that on some online forum I recall you recently saying something to the effect of "I'm done with him" in reference to me, I don't really understand why you bothered posting a comment here." For the sake of the conversation perhaps you could address Donna's most recent post.
I'm still open for reconciliation (agree to disagree) between the two of us if you ever change your mind. Or if you seriously want to continue this argument I'll gladly take it private."
That's nice of you to say. But... I think it's pretty clear that even without any kind of "reconciliation", we will be agreeing to disagree. As I said in my email to you back on April 16, 2008:
"With comments like "by removing work that you and Kevin did together and replacing it with 100% of your own work, you are removing Kevin from the history of the TMNT comic books", I don't think we even share a common frame of reference."
I might consider picking up on our email discussion, but it would have to be without your ""I DO NOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO PUBLISH" caveat. -- PL
I don't want to be childish and petty; I just want to have an adult conversation. I do not believe it is possible to have such a conversation if there is intention to publish it, so I can't agree to that.
"roseangelo said...
I don't want to be childish and petty; I just want to have an adult conversation. I do not believe it is possible to have such a conversation if there is intention to publish it, so I can't agree to that."
I don't understand your reasoning here, but maybe that's just me. In any event, I don't believe I ever said I had the INTENTION to publish it... I just wanted to have the freedom to do so. -- PL
Originally I thought I disagreed completely with you, Mr. Laird (can I call you Peter, or Pete or is that to informal) but after reading your last bit about the time travel aspect of the movie, I actually agree with you.
I really enjoyed the movie, as a second generation mild Trekker...or is it Trekkie...see how big a fan I am. My mother, who I saw it with (no comments please, I took her for Mother's Day...I'm a cheap son...it is my shame.) also really liked it, but I agree the whole time travel, "alternate Spock" thing felt like a huge cop-out to keep this from being a prequel saddled with the 40ish years of continuity and as not quite a re-boot either. Other than that the characterizations (save maybe Spock's emotional outburst, though I guess with Vulcan's destruction they are explainable) were very well done and the action was great. All in all a fun popcorn movie.
Just my $.02, just as Peter's initial blog post was his.
i will be hoenst, having seen roses posts at her own tmnt "news" blog and at the technodrome forums and given everything she has said about peter, the turtles, etc. i find it incredible that she is blocking possible reconciliation because she does not want whatever is in that letter to be referenced or published. what is in there that is any different to anything else we have heard her say?
Apparently he does it by tearing into Roseangelo.
Point, Cynthia, except I would point out myself that that is hardly the typical responds he has shown to most people. I think its apparent that Rosie and Peter have more of a history here than just the one blog post. Just from what I've personally read here on the blogs, I might have lost my temper a lot sooner than I think he has.
And really Cynthia, are you really going to suggest she/he really meant "But what do I know?" That whole sarcastic “Oh poor me” ending? Please, I think that in itself shows a particular level of unhealthy bitterness/Sarcasm over the whole matter.
This is something, Donna, I have observed in many creators. They do something that fans disagree with. Some fans go beyond the normal "I don’t like it, there I have had my say" and begin to re-state the same complaints over and over and over again. The creator starts polite, but after a slew of e-mails, blog posts, etc, finally has had enough and simply starts ripping into people right back.
Honestly, in my opinion, the fact that Peter bothers to respond at all...that he has over and over and over and over again presented his view on the changes, why he thinks they were the right thing to do, shows a level of involvement with the fans that many creators don't have. If he REALLY didn't care, why bother presenting his point of view? Why bother defending the changes? Honestly, he could very easily not respond at all, no matter what. Many creators do just that. Easier on the fingers and the brain.
I would also point out something else I have observed. Peter didn’t like the movie. Okay. I disagree with him that it was bad, or that it disrespected the material just as I disagree with many here that what Peter has changed has ruined the books, or disrespected his own material. However, I understand a blog is a place to vent. Fair enough. I’m sure many here have their own blogs, and many here I’m sure have vented against what they feel was unjust to the turtles. Also fair enough.
I would make a bet, however, that Peter did not go out and track JJ Abrams blog to air his grievances. He probably has not even sent JJ an e-mail. He hasn’t tracked JJ down on message boards and complained constantly to him about what he feels is wrong with the film.
I also would make a safe bet many here have done that to Peter. This very thread proves that at least. This is also something I have seen at multiple fan gatherings as well. I have seen reasonable and wonderful people, act rudely and angrily when they simply have had enough. I believe it may be a fair point that perhaps at this time, that’s what we are seeing in Peter. Maybe the sheer volume of people who feel not only that they might send him one communication with their grievances (and even then, lets say ¼ of turtles fans have done this….a huge number alone…..) but lets say even ¼ of them do it ALL THE TIME. Lets say they wait on the blog for the first chance to go back to the old gripes again.
I think personally, I would stop feeling respect for their opinions. I would stop wanting to be empathetic but stay my own course. I think that at that point I personally would have started saying things like “I know from past experience that you are not shy about displaying your ofttimes epic cluelessness to all and sundry, but this is extreme even for you.”
In fact personally, I might have been a hell of a lot more rude than that to some folks.
Here’s what my experiences have brought me to conclude. Many fans who are disgruntled and are taking the time and the energy to project this level of protest are not actually looking for respect. That is what is claimed, but really its not. They are either looking to try and badger the creator to do what they want (rarely works) or simply looking to annoy/upset the creator as much as they feel wronged. It is very much revenge ideal.
Here’s how I take this kind of thing. This past year, DC comics ruined a character I have loved for many years. I was pretty damned upset. I signed a petition to ask they not do it. They did it anyway. I commented on it on a few comics blogs that the topic was brought up. And then I stopped buying DC books. I did not track down the writers/artists/big wigs on their blogs to lodge multiple complaints. I didn’t e-mail the offices many times I day. I let it go. It sucks they did it, but in the end it’s a comic book character. Yes, one I enjoyed very much, but still a comic book character.
Peter didn’t like the film. I hardly think he is going to spend a lot of time griping about it. I bet we don’t see another complaint about it again for a long time, if not ever. I doubt I can say the same for some fans here.
On another note, I'm really intrigued by the subject matter of your book, Sarah. Coming from a background in psychology myself, plus having been deeply involved in this fandom and seen it touch so many aspects of my and others' lives, the topic sounds really interestingI'm glad you think so, I do as well. I have seen fandom help people become richer and fuller people, I have also seen it used as a shield and a crutch, harming folks by becoming their sole focus, an obsession perhaps even in a way an illness. I find both ends very interesting, and I hope if I do a good job with the book, perhaps we'll see more of the former, and much less of the latter.
I would very much like to converse with you on the topic sometime. I am not a doctor, so I am looking at it from an experienced layman's point of view.
PL said...
"From what I've read, the main cast of the new "Star Trek" movie has been signed for at least two sequels, and I believe I read (or heard in a radio interview) that J.J. Abrams is interested in directing at least one more "Star Trek". Assuming that is true, I believe it is safe to assume that the next few "Star Trek" movies will follow in the footsteps of this first one, and it seems very likely that all "Star Trek" from this day forward will fall into this new continuity."
I believe this might be jumping the continuity gun a bit, the next several movies may indeed be based in this new universe, but I don't see all Star Trek being put into this continuity.
Both universes can co-exist, and thrive if properly managed, that if anything else can be applied to to the TMNT franchise.
To be fair, I don't think ANYONE can speak accurately about an argument between Peter and anyone else unless they know the ENTIRE story. There are always two sides, and unless both people have decided to make it our personal business by revealing every sordid detail, we really have no right to pass judment.
Dragon Turtle :
Both universes can co-exist, and thrive if properly managed, that if anything else can be applied to to the TMNT franchise.//
//
-->> .. BINGO !!
I really wasn't going to comment here again, and I'm sorry to everyone for doing so because this is getting pretty pointless and silly, but since things I've said here keep getting addressed, I feel the need to counter on some of them. This will be my last comment, because quite frankly, my head is really starting to hurt from pounding it against the wall so much.
Sarah--I'm not sure how you know what Peter's "typical" response to fans is when all you really have access to are the things he wants you to have access to. I've heard and seen many a time when he's been rude to fans, sometimes warranted, but sometimes seemingly for no good reason. Without getting too far into it, I'll say that I had one of the latter experiences a few years ago when I relayed to an email group something Kevin Eastman told some of us about the franchise. It wasn't anything harmful in any way, and I was only sharing information with other fans, but Peter (whom I had never met nor conversed with) sent me an email ripping me apart. I was quite shocked and upset, and I admit that kind of jaded me a bit. Still, after I got over that, I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt.
You say creators aren't obligated to respect their fans, and I guess in a way that's true. But one thing to remember is the reason anything gets popular to begin with is because there are people who enjoy it. If no one enjoyed it--if the TMNT never gained fans, it would have died out a long time ago. As a sort of "creator" myself, I realize that my writing will never take off or be successful without people there who like it. And while I don't have to respect each and every one of my potential "fans", I can appreciate the fact that they're supportive of my creation. You're right in that we create for ourselves. TMNT is Peter's universe, not mine. I never implied that he had to write the Turtles just how I want. In fact, I don't think anyone here has said that. Yes, we've stated some things we don't like about the franchise currently, but those are our opinions, and we're entitled to them just as Peter is entitled to ignore them. And I'd also like to state that I, for one, didn't mention anything specific that I didn't like until people asked for it.
As I said in my previous comment, I don't think anyone here knows enough to be able to say what Rose did or did not mean by what she wrote. Yes, it had a sarcastic air to it, but maybe you would be feeling the same way about things if you'd had the same experience she has. There is more to this than you know about--far more. And quite frankly, the fact that you seem to want to psychoanalyze all of us who dare to disagree with Peter is a little offensive and kind of weird.
For the record, most of us have lives, and thus way better things to do than stalk Peter every day, waiting for an opportunity to snap at him. I can only speak for myself here, but I didn't track Peter down to berate him for stuff I don't like. I've been reading his blog since he first put it up, and this is the first time I've ever said anything to him (here or otherwise) about the fact that I'm not entirely happy with the changes. You make it sound like I was sitting here rubbing my hands together and waiting for the first chance I got to rip him with my claws, and that's simply not the truth. As stated before, I found an irony in his post that compelled me to say what I said.
If Peter has expressed his view on the changes and has explained why he made them, then I guess I just haven't been around to see that. Unfortunately, the only responses I've seen have been "If you don't like it, don't read it." Yes, I can understand why being told the same thing over and over again would bother him, but if that many people have that much issue with it, I would think he would at least look at what he's done and where he's taking the franchise objectively. Sometimes you've got to be able to take a step back and look at the big picture.
Basically, you're saying that Peter has a right to be rude to his fans, which, okay, for the sake of argument, say that he has felt like he's been badgered by certain people. I still think it's in really bad taste to say what he did to Rose (especially publicly). But then, that's just my opinion.
Sarah The Anime Librarian said...
Some fans go beyond the normal "I don’t like it, there I have had my say" and begin to re-state the same complaints over and over and over again.... Just for the record, I have never, until this conversation, expressed to Peter Laird any negative opinions toward anything he's done. It came up in this context, but even here I haven't expressed exactly what it is that I think doesn't work about Vol 4, which has been my (silent) pet peeve. The truth is, most of us here have only had these conversations privately. And despite appearances to the contrary, there are a *lot* of "us" who simply haven't spoken up.
Honestly, in my opinion, the fact that Peter bothers to respond at all...that he has over and over and over and over again presented his view on the changes, why he thinks they were the right thing to do...Just as honestly, I have never ever seen anything from Peter explaining why he has made the changes in the Turtles way of life or even a suggestion that we need to be patient and see where he's going with the story arc. If I've *missed* that somewhere I apologize and would love to be directed to it. But those who have voiced dissatisfaction (with admittedly varying levels of vehemence) all I have seen as a response has been something like, "then don't read it" or nothing at all. I have never seen any explanation for any of what people have been upset about. If it came up in the letters column or here somewhere and I missed it, again, apologies and please show me what was said. I really, really, want to know the reasons.
Anyway, while I would really love to hear from Peter on my earlier comments I addressed to *him*, I appreciate this conversation with you, Sarah. I very much would like to carve out a space somewhere that we can talk about fandoms and the effects on individuals you mentioned.
Hey Dawn, Donna, folks
Let me re-state for the record that I am not particularly pointing any fingers at any one person here. You say this is the first time you’ve ever brought this topic up, and I will say that I personally take you for your word. But my point was simply that this is a topic I’m quite sure that some fans have in fact persued to an unhealthy level. I’m suggesting that if people feel he has been rude…and I personally think that he has in fact lost his temper and has been on several occasions I have personally experienced…that maybe to consider WHY he may be taking an automatic position of offence with folks that bring the topic up.
And quite frankly, the fact that you seem to want to psychoanalyze all of us who dare to disagree with Peter is a little offensive and kind of weird.Ah, but that assumes that I have never “dared” disagree with Peter. And I’m afraid you’re wrong. If I’ve caused personal offense to you, I’m sorry. That isn’t my intention. And again, I’m not suggesting that any one person here is an unhealthy fan (I did mean exactly what I said about Cynthia’s sarcasm, but again that was to call on any idea that she was somehow being serious with what she ended with. I find that idea rather silly.)
I’m only trying to cast this whole argument in the light of the larger. People are very involved with this from a personal level, and I think that they have trouble stepping back to see the bigger picture.
Let me explain a little why I’m making some connections here. I’ve recently started doing a side business based off my work with conventions, where I have taken over the fan response duties for several comics creators, voice actors, ect. Basically my job is to answer e-mail, blog posts, message boards, etc posing as the creator simply because they don’t have time to respond.
I am sympathetic to Peter in this manner, because I myself have seen the VAST amount of fandom that behaves in the manner that I’ve been pointing out first hand. These letters/responses aren’t even really to me, but even I find myself at times wanting to itch to respond in a harsh and rude way. The sheer level of bizarre “You owe us” mentality in fandoms is mind boggling.
Now, again, I’m not saying anyone here is personally like that, or personally suggesting that. Peter owes them anything. (And I’m not saying they aren’t,. some here may very well feel like that in.) But what I am saying is, I totally see where the overload is. I see where the line of polite can get lost in the sheer “Holy mother of….not again. Do I have to talk about this AGAIN!”
I believe that there is a measure of vampirism in fandom. When Dawn says :” You say creators aren't obligated to respect their fans, and I guess in a way that's true. But one thing to remember is the reason anything gets popular to begin with is because there are people who enjoy it. If no one enjoyed it--if the TMNT never gained fans, it would have died out a long time ago.” She is absolutely right….except I would offer my opinion that that does not equal a covenant with a creator. But many fans of various fandoms do feel that way. They feel that spending money on something equals some kind of deal with the powers that be over that creation. In my opinion, all it means is you pays your money, you gets your ride.
Some people here have expressed that they want empathy, and respect from Peter. I understand that, I do. We want respect from everyone.
Lets say for the sake of argument he is not respectful. At all. Ever. Any fan that disagrees with him gets an earful. I would ask myself “Why do I want his respect and empathy?” I believe that’s a valid question. Who is Peter Laird? Some guy, that helped make a comic. You like the comic, ok. You don’t anymore, ok too. But he’s just a guy. He doesn’t know me, you, or Brad Pitt from Adam. He doesn’t owe us respect or empathy, any more than we owe him that.
Yes we support his book with our money. And if we don’t like the book, we don’t. And that’s all. That’s all we need do as fans, or as disgruntled fans.
My intention here is not to offend, nor to analyze people individually. But considering the face that it seems that when these topics come up, the most vocal people seem to tend to be the ones who feel that they wronged here, I thought that it was time someone as vocal stepped up from a different angle. Having experienced a little of what it might be like for Peter, I wanted to show that side through questions and statements to hopefully get folks to see through a slightly different angle. Not on Peter per say, although I think this is valid, but on some aspects of the fandom we don’t think about.
The e-mail is attached here, so feel free to tag me. But I’m not sure this IS something we ought to take in private. I think this is something that as a fandom, belongs to be discussed in the open. I know many here disagree with me, and let me say that I do respect that. A lot. I am taking what everyone says into consideration and research for my possible writings on the matter. I know I have offended folks, and for that again I am sorry. But I truly hope I have helped folks think in a bigger picture, think a little differently. As you have to me.
I am still very interested in folk feedback of what they want from Peter. What kind of responses they feel are appropriate.
all I have seen as a response has been something like, "then don't read it" or nothing at all. I have never seen any explanation for any of what people have been upset about.I have seen such responses in the letter pages of the turtles in the past in bits and pieces. But honestly, I don't think he does that so much any more.
I believe that he is taking a route with this that many involved creators end up having to take. Stop responding at all (or respond with a simple "Don't like it don;t buy it" or end up driving yourself nuts while having the same conversations over and over again.
Or hire a ghost writer to answer all your mail, blog post replies, etc. Which by the way, Peter, if you're still reading and are interested my rates are very reasonable. :P
"Dawn said...
I'm not sure how you know what Peter's "typical" response to fans is when all you really have access to are the things he wants you to have access to. I've heard and seen many a time when he's been rude to fans, sometimes warranted, but sometimes seemingly for no good reason."
I would be interested if you could specifically point out even just a few of the "for no good reason" incidents. And when you claim to have "heard and seen" these "many" times when I have allegedly been rude to fans, are you referring to things you've read, online or in print, or have you actually been to conventions or store signings and OBSERVED me acting in this fashion?" Without getting too far into it, I'll say that I had one of the latter experiences a few years ago when I relayed to an email group something Kevin Eastman told some of us about the franchise. It wasn't anything harmful in any way, and I was only sharing information with other fans, but Peter (whom I had never met nor conversed with) sent me an email ripping me apart. I was quite shocked and upset, and I admit that kind of jaded me a bit. Still, after I got over that, I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt."
Fascinating. I have a vague memory of this communication -- I'd have to search my email archives to find it -- but I don't recall "ripping... apart" anyone. -- PL
" GreenWillow said...
Just for the record, I have never, until this conversation, expressed to Peter Laird any negative opinions toward anything he's done. It came up in this context, but even here I haven't expressed exactly what it is that I think doesn't work about Vol 4, which has been my (silent) pet peeve. The truth is, most of us here have only had these conversations privately. And despite appearances to the contrary, there are a *lot* of "us" who simply haven't spoken up."
I'm curious -- why have you remained silent? Obviously it is your right to do so, and there is nothing wrong with that. I must assume that whatever it is you are peeved about isn't important enough to you to lead you to write about it. Unless it was more stuff along the lines of "your writing sucks and Jim Lawson's art sucks", I think I'd be interested in hearing it.
"Anyway, while I would really love to hear from Peter on my earlier comments "
If you would -- which earlier comments? -- PL
PL said...
I'm curious -- why have you remained silent? Obviously it is your right to do so, and there is nothing wrong with that.Honestly? Because I was afraid anything I wrote would be taken as an attack. Online and written communication is limiting and things can come across as much harsher than they were intended. Sometimes things get said that no one would ever say to a person face to face. I was-- and still am-- hoping to one day have a conversation, not an argument.
I must assume that whatever it is you are peeved about isn't important enough to you to lead you to write about it.No, to the contrary, it's very important to me- important enough that I was waiting for the right venue to even approach it and hopefully a moment when you'd be receptive to talking about it. (I have followed your conversations with Rosemary and regardless of "who started it" or "who threw the first stone" I *really* wouldn't want our conversation to deteriorate to that level--hence my hesitation.)
Unless it was more stuff along the lines of "your writing sucks and Jim Lawson's art sucks", I think I'd be interested in hearing it.LOL! No, I think I can articulate my concerns a little better than that. And I cannot tell you how happy I am that you'd like to hear my perspective -- and hopefully talk about it. I really just want to have that conversation. I'll write it up in my next set of comments if that's all right. This one's getting kind of lengthy.
"Anyway, while I would really love to hear from Peter on my earlier comments "
If you would -- which earlier comments? -- Oh, this one:
GreenWillow said...
Peter-- I wasn't intending to compare the extent of the changes between the past and present of either story line. I agree with you *entirely* when you say comparing changes to the Star Trek Universe in this new movie and the TMNT storyline is apples and oranges. It's two completely different things.
The only comparison I wanted to make was between your reaction to the Star Trek changes and some of our reactions to the Vol 4 changes. I was only trying to point out how as fans we (SOME of the "we"!) have gone through the same hair-tearing, breast-beating, anguished cries of "OH NOES!" that some Trek fans have had in response to this film. (I do hope my attempt at humor is coming through here...It's so hard with only print to work with...)
Fans are a weird breed. We get very emotional and very attached to our fandoms.
There's some stuff I personally would have liked to have seen happen differently in Vol 4 but I am *very* aware that it's not my book, it's not my baby and all I can do is whimper and sulk. Which is unpleasant for all concerned and I probably won't keep it up for very long. ;o)
I will promise you though, that when I do get my funky little web comic launched I will come begging and pleading to you for critique and I promise I will not flinch if you slice and dice. Fair is fair.
And no matter what, I will always love your little green guys. Where ever they end up.
~Donna
"
"Anyway, while I would really love to hear from Peter on my earlier comments "
If you would -- which earlier comments? -- Oh, this one:
GreenWillow said...
Peter-- I wasn't intending to compare the extent of the changes between the past and present of either story line. I agree with you *entirely* when you say comparing changes to the Star Trek Universe in this new movie and the TMNT storyline is apples and oranges. It's two completely different things.
The only comparison I wanted to make was between your reaction to the Star Trek changes and some of our reactions to the Vol 4 changes. I was only trying to point out how as fans we (SOME of the "we"!) have gone through the same hair-tearing, breast-beating, anguished cries of "OH NOES!" that some Trek fans have had in response to this film. (I do hope my attempt at humor is coming through here...It's so hard with only print to work with...)
Fans are a weird breed. We get very emotional and very attached to our fandoms.
There's some stuff I personally would have liked to have seen happen differently in Vol 4 but I am *very* aware that it's not my book, it's not my baby and all I can do is whimper and sulk. Which is unpleasant for all concerned and I probably won't keep it up for very long. ;o)"
You know, I think all of this back and forth has actually been worthwhile. I think I'm finally getting the point, now that some more well thought out explanations of certain comments have been made. It seems that there is agreement here, more or less, that the type and scope of change Abrams made to the "Star Trek" universe in this new movie is really not comparable to what I've done with the TMNT -- and that's what I was objecting to. Perhaps this analogy might be useful: I look at what I've done with the TMNT as akin to a light slap on the hand. I view what Abrams has done with "Star Trek" as more like a crushing "haymaker" to the cranium. And I didn't think it was at all fair to equate the two approaches. "I will promise you though, that when I do get my funky little web comic launched I will come begging and pleading to you for critique and I promise I will not flinch if you slice and dice. Fair is fair."
I will endeavor to give a fair critique. -- PL
This is for Dawn.
Re: the email in which I alledgedly "ripped you apart"... did it start with the following?
"Dawn,
I was recently made aware of a couple of things you posted on a TMNT list and felt some clarification was in order."
That's the only email I can find which refers to something you posted online. The only other email I could find was one I'd sent to you some months earlier thanking you for the kind words you'd sent in an email to me expressing excitement about the upcoming publication of the first issue of TMNT Vol. 4. -- PL
If the entire point is “How Peter feels about this movie is how I feel about the Turltes.” then I would say there is a point to be made there. Feelings are feelings. I can wonder about where they come from, modivations, and why/how they’re chosen to be expressed, (the choice of where that I brought up earlier, etc.) but feelings are always valid to the feeler. It doesn't make the feelings fact, but they are still valid. If that was misunderstood in my earlier statements, or if I mispoke my understanding of that, I again appologize.
For example: Dawn feels some of what I’ve said is offensive. I disagree with that hugely, but I understand that’s how she feels. I dispute the fact of the conclusion, but not the feelings that birthed that conclusion.
Perhaps this analogy might be useful: I look at what I've done with the TMNT as akin to a light slap on the hand. I view what Abrams has done with "Star Trek" as more like a crushing "haymaker" to the cranium. And I didn't think it was at all fair to equate the two approachesI would even disagree with how far that analogy. What you have chosen to change about the turtles is like a man who has come up with a wonderful milkshake recipe deciding that after all these years he’s going to change the flavor of the ice cream and throw in some blackberries. You may love the new one, you made hate it. But its his. What was done to Star Trek (hate it love it whatever) is someone else taking the same recipe for a wonderful milkshake that man spent his whole life making and changing the ice cream flavor, throwing in a handful of blackberries, some rasberry syrup, and a cup of cream. It may be wonderful, it may be terrible, but it is still an outsider with anothers creation.
In response to Peter's, "Unless it was more stuff along the lines of "your writing sucks and Jim Lawson's art sucks", I think I'd be interested in hearing it."***
My Concerns About Vol. 4, or Why Donna Has Spent the Last Five Years Walking in Little Circles Talking to Herself. ;o)
***
Let me preface this by saying that I don't fit into the normal 20-to-30-something "adult fan" demographic. My kids, especially the oldest who is turning 30 this year (!!) got me interested in the Turtles. I started writing TMNT fan fiction in 1990 pre-Internet and before I knew what word for it was, and began posting online in 1997. It's terrible writing, don't read it please, but I mention this because writing and drawing-- all that fan-stuff -- rekindled my love for telling stories with pictures and words and so for that alone I am forever in debt to you and Kevin. 'Nuff said.
Several things got me hooked on the whole Turtle Mythos, some of which I mentioned in an earlier post here, but among those elements was the sense that here were four little guys with really only themselves to depend upon, outcasts from society through no fault of their own, living in isolation, yet still trying to do the right things. This theme is one of those wonderful universals that so many people (I'd bet *everyone*, at some time, even if they won't admit it) relate to-- that feeling of not fitting in, of being *apart* somehow from "everyone else". Only in the Turtles case it was magnified 100-fold because they had no hope of *ever* really fitting in. They were unique in the world and once they were gone, that would be it; no heirs, no one to carry on or even remember they were here. Wonderful existential angst stuff.
What happened in Vol 4 with the landing of the aliens is that the Turtles were no longer outcasts; they are free to walk abroad--which, while great for them, saps that emotional element that touched people, perhaps some in ways that they aren't even aware of.
Now as much as I personally don't like that change in the Turtles way of life, that by itself isn't the whole problem.
Peter, I think you've probably gotten some feedback from readers that the story-line tends to meander. At least, that has been my sense of it, too and I think I know in part, why it feels that way.
At the end of City at War there was this spectacular change in the Turtles lives. It was a wonderful resolution, sort of a solid completion to the "Coming of Age" story that the Turtles overall story tells. Along with that sense of completion to the story one of the Core Conflicts was lost-- the blood feud between the Foot Clan.
Sure, Baxter was still around and kicking, but his battle with the TMNT never seemed to feel that epic, the multi-generational blood feud that they had with the Foot. I'm not saying that peace with the Foot shouldn't have happened, only that there was a loss with that resolution.
But then with the arrival of the aliens we lose the other Core Conflict-- the conflict the Turtles have with trying to survive in a world that would never understand them.
So without either of those two important conflicts that shaped both who the TMNT are (how they see themselves, how they function in the world) *and* provided structure to hang a plot on, the story -telling becomes (I think) sort of rudderless. It seems to me --fledgling writer that I may be-- that this lack of conflict presents a real challenge for a writer to sustain the tension necessary to keep readers roped in. I think this is the problem you've got with Vol 4 is the lack of that conflict-building tension-climax-resolution formula. You've got conflicts there, of course, but there's a fundamental difference in the feeling now of how threatening these threats really are. There may be threats to their *lives*, but not to their very existence, if that makes sense.
Okay, I've got a couple other little nits but I feel like I've just dropped enough on you with all that.
Now please bear in mind that I will not be offended if you want to dismiss all the above. I certainly don't know if those changes in who the TMNT are were part of a very deliberate plan on your part, or how you plan to resolve all the story threads. Obviously, I don't know any of that -- but these are the major things that have made me stumble in reading Vol 4.
Please just look at this as feedback from a fan who has thought about this entirely too much. ;o)\
~Donna
PL said:
"I'm curious -- why have you remained silent? Obviously it is your right to do so, and there is nothing wrong with that. I must assume that whatever it is you are peeved about isn't important enough to you to lead you to write about it."
I guess the reason I have felt non-inclined to write and voice my grievences is because I feel why should I take the time to attempt to write out the reasons for my contempt of volume 4 when it will more than likely be ignored.
Sarah said:
"I am still very interested in folk feedback of what they want from Peter. What kind of responses they feel are appropriate."
I've thought about this long and hard and the type of responses I guess I want are EXPLAINATIONS! I mean, If I take the time to explain "I dislike the way Jim lawson draws faces because they are non-symetrical" then I would like a thought-out answer such as "I enjoy Jim's work, and chose him as an artist because he works fast and his art has a simple flavor to it that doesnt detract from the storytelling." or something simular. Instead I get either NO response, or a response that says "Well I like it, so there." I want to know WHY some choices are made! I would expect a kurt response like those if I had flamed and said something like "Jim Lawson's art sux!" However, when I take the time to figure out and explain what specifically bothers me about an aspect of the comic, I would like the creator to give me a decent answer.
I am a LOT more tolarent of changes when I can see things from a creator's perspective. As another example, WHY did Peter choose to shrink Don down and keep him that way? I've heard fan hypothesis, but never an offical answer. Is it just because he was bored that afternoon? WHY? From Peter's blog entries and replies, I *KNOW* he's a relatively smart guy, he has to have a REASON behind it, and fans WANT to know! If he cant reveal why he did it yet, that's fine, then tell us THAT. Don't just ignore me or tell me you did it because you like Don better pint-size.
I think if I had more EXPLAINATIONS as to why things were done, I would be a LOT more accepting of the changes that have happened in volume 4.
Unless some interesting point is going to be made, I think I will just leave it on two notes:
- Rose might have been a tad off on that whole 'Erasing Kevin Eastman from the history' regarding issue 8 statement. Starts to loose a bit of credibility there. And Kevin Eastman CAN do wrong. Need I bring up BodyCount (worst piece of TMNT ever written) or Next Mutation (promise, but major flaws)
- Peter, What would be the need for the right to publish it? The only thing I can see needing that for is once you two had settled out differences, you'd want to post the final 'cease fire' agreement for everyone to see. Other than that, what harm is there in not getting permission to post it online?
I will also say that while some folks bring up good points, some I agree with, some I don't as in any argument, I would like to thank Peter and the rest of the Mirage guys for still taking time to chat. Try doing this on a DC website and it would have been shut down long ago :)...
Blogger Neil said...
I will also say that while some folks bring up good points, some I agree with, some I don't as in any argument, I would like to thank Peter and the rest of the Mirage guys for still taking time to chat. Try doing this on a DC website and it would have been shut down long ago :)...Amen to that, brother. Amen to that!
Weird-- the word verification for me today is "trang"-- too bad that t isn't a k...
Cynthia (with a C)
Two things:
Neil said..
I would like to thank Peter and the rest of the Mirage guys for still taking time to chat. Try doing this on a DC website and it would have been shut down long ago :)...Amen that!
I said: "I will come begging and pleading to you for critique and I promise I will not flinch if you slice and dice. Fair is fair."
PL said:...I will endeavor to give a fair critique.Thank you thank you! Nothing could inspire me more to get off my duff and get this thing up and running.
~Donna
Excellent Mica! Thank you!
I started writing TMNT fan fiction in 1990 pre-Internet and before I knew what word for it was, and began posting online in 1997. It's terrible writing, don't read it please, but I mention this because writing and drawing-- all that fan-stuff -- rekindled my love for telling stories with pictures and words and so for that alone I am forever in debt to you and Kevin. 'Nuff said. Brilliant Donna. This is a fantastic example of the positive side of fandom that I'd also like to explore in more detail.
You express how you feel about what the turtles meant as outcasts, Donna. I think the expression is very well written, extremely meaningful to share. Let me offer my respect for your openness, by offering my take on why I think the change made the book so much more rich.
I found turtles as a very shy, very outcast kid who was on the fringe of her jr-highschool peers. I too was attracted to the idea of the turtles as outcasts as well. In a very real way, the Turtles were an excellent metaphor for that stage of life where you really do believe you are an ugly duckling in a pond of swans. I wrote an essay on this years ago for a local pod cast called “TMNT saved my life.”
Now though, I have gone many miles and many years since. I am a woman of 31 now, not a child of 13. I have discovered something wonderful. My strangeness did not make me a duckling, but a swan. What was seen as weird back when I was a scared kid bloomed into something that attracted people to me. A confidence in my own way, my own sight, and my own power of creativity and vision, that opened the world and other people to me. The otherness was not gone, but my way of looking at it had changed entirely, and in that others saw me in a very different way.
A short way of putting this was, I grew up.
In my opinion, in a very real way, so did the TMNT books. By opening the world to them through the aliens, it was very much like the world being opened to me. By no longer limiting the boys by their strangeness, the books have allowed them to grow up as well. Yes the title is still Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, but that’s simply because its what recognized. They are not teenagers, and this has nothing to do with age. They are adults. They are in the world.
When Splinter died I was heartbroken. I wish so that it was not so. But despite that, I saw it as another part of that process. Part of adulthood is recognizing your parent’s mortality, and in that your own. When my own father died in 2005, there was an echo there I did not miss. Here was another part of that journey.
I believe that limiting the turtles simply by their appeal as outcasts limits the characters themselves, as I might be limited had I retained my adolescent angst into adulthood.
Oh! And my appologies to Cynthia. It was Rose who was being sarcastic not she. When I'm juggling several paragraphs, things can get switched. Cynthia, I appologize deeply for the mix up.
Thanks, Sarah--
Yeah, I do understand that transition into adulthood that the Turtles have made in Vol 4, and I can see it as a reflection of all of our journeys to adulthood.
What comes to mind though, is the oft- repeated caveat against art imitating life too closely, and that is that Life has no plot.;o)
(BTW, you have no idea how many people I've talked to who have a "How the TMNT saved My Life" story-- it's astonishing how that theme comes up over and over for fans!)
~Donna
-->> On Topic to the trek film ::
J.J. is full of hype .. everything he helps create or manifest is hot right now.
People salivate over it and the media goes to bed with it no matter what.
"LOST" got lost on me years ago. I'm sure his other shows are just dandy.
I fed into the hype of his infamous ' Cloverfield ' ( which sadly now wanes on me .. i don't care for it so much as i did. ) .
If Paramount wanted to bring the franchise ' BACK ' into the spotlight.
The knew people'd love it or hate it.
THE KNEW FULL WELL IT WOULD RAISE 1000s OF EYEBROWS !! They Knew J.J. could pull a big box office stunt that would make bank and continue to keep 'em on the map.
not gonna say it's good or bad.
But they have succeeded at many things..creating so much buzz and hype , making new fans, pissing people and long-time fans off,punching some in the guy and inspiring others,making allot of money , and well the list goes from there.
--
//
Neil :: And Kevin Eastman CAN do wrong. Need I bring up BodyCount (worst piece of TMNT ever written)//-->> .. much like i disagree with my friends Mica, Donna, and Rose on Volume Four..
i also strongly disagree with that statement.
It's your opinion. You simply don't approve of the the story, buddy. Doesn't make it the ' WORST ' Ever.
Sorry.
//
or Next Mutation (promise, but major flaws)//
-->> .. disagree with that one too.. but i'm not gonna go there.
>v<
Donna : (BTW, you have no idea how many people I've talked to who have a "How the TMNT saved My Life" story-- it's astonishing how that theme comes up over and over for fans!)
..
-->> .. -
~ tOkKa said...
..
-->> .. - **
You winkin' at me there, fellah?
;o)
I hear ya Donna, tons of the same echos over and over. I think hats why the best of fandoms thrive. That same thread of "How this worked in a positive way for me"
Maybe life has no plot...maybe...or maybe we simply don't see it. Who Knows!
Might make an interesting story! ;)
GreenWillow said...
In response to Peter's, "Unless it was more stuff along the lines of "your writing sucks and Jim Lawson's art sucks", I think I'd be interested in hearing it."***
My Concerns About Vol. 4, or Why Donna Has Spent the Last Five Years Walking in Little Circles Talking to Herself. ;o)
***
Let me preface this by saying that I don't fit into the normal 20-to-30-something "adult fan" demographic. My kids, especially the oldest who is turning 30 this year (!!) got me interested in the Turtles. I started writing TMNT fan fiction in 1990 pre-Internet and before I knew what word for it was, and began posting online in 1997. It's terrible writing, don't read it please, but I mention this because writing and drawing-- all that fan-stuff -- rekindled my love for telling stories with pictures and words and so for that alone I am forever in debt to you and Kevin. 'Nuff said.
Several things got me hooked on the whole Turtle Mythos, some of which I mentioned in an earlier post here, but among those elements was the sense that here were four little guys with really only themselves to depend upon, outcasts from society through no fault of their own, living in isolation, yet still trying to do the right things. This theme is one of those wonderful universals that so many people (I'd bet *everyone*, at some time, even if they won't admit it) relate to-- that feeling of not fitting in, of being *apart* somehow from "everyone else". Only in the Turtles case it was magnified 100-fold because they had no hope of *ever* really fitting in. They were unique in the world and once they were gone, that would be it; no heirs, no one to carry on or even remember they were here. Wonderful existential angst stuff.
What happened in Vol 4 with the landing of the aliens is that the Turtles were no longer outcasts; they are free to walk abroad--which, while great for them, saps that emotional element that touched people, perhaps some in ways that they aren't even aware of.
Now as much as I personally don't like that change in the Turtles way of life, that by itself isn't the whole problem.
Peter, I think you've probably gotten some feedback from readers that the story-line tends to meander. At least, that has been my sense of it, too and I think I know in part, why it feels that way.
At the end of City at War there was this spectacular change in the Turtles lives. It was a wonderful resolution, sort of a solid completion to the "Coming of Age" story that the Turtles overall story tells. Along with that sense of completion to the story one of the Core Conflicts was lost-- the blood feud between the Foot Clan.
Sure, Baxter was still around and kicking, but his battle with the TMNT never seemed to feel that epic, the multi-generational blood feud that they had with the Foot. I'm not saying that peace with the Foot shouldn't have happened, only that there was a loss with that resolution.
But then with the arrival of the aliens we lose the other Core Conflict-- the conflict the Turtles have with trying to survive in a world that would never understand them.
So without either of those two important conflicts that shaped both who the TMNT are (how they see themselves, how they function in the world) *and* provided structure to hang a plot on, the story -telling becomes (I think) sort of rudderless. It seems to me --fledgling writer that I may be-- that this lack of conflict presents a real challenge for a writer to sustain the tension necessary to keep readers roped in. I think this is the problem you've got with Vol 4 is the lack of that conflict-building tension-climax-resolution formula. You've got conflicts there, of course, but there's a fundamental difference in the feeling now of how threatening these threats really are. There may be threats to their *lives*, but not to their very existence, if that makes sense.
Okay, I've got a couple other little nits but I feel like I've just dropped enough on you with all that.
Now please bear in mind that I will not be offended if you want to dismiss all the above. I certainly don't know if those changes in who the TMNT are were part of a very deliberate plan on your part, or how you plan to resolve all the story threads. Obviously, I don't know any of that -- but these are the major things that have made me stumble in reading Vol 4.
Please just look at this as feedback from a fan who has thought about this entirely too much. ;o)\
~Donna
You have some completely valid points. Let me see if I can give you a bit of perspective from my side of things.
When I began TMNT Volume 4, I had been with the Turtles as co-creator and co-owner for about fifteen years. By that time, the whole "ninja hiding in the darkness" thing had kind of lost its appeal, at least for me. It's not that it's a bad concept, I was simply tired of it. I wanted to set up a situation where the Turtles could begin to interact with the larger world in ways they had not been able to previously. Having aliens land on Earth and establish a public presence seemed to be a good way to accomplish this -- giving the Turtles the ability to "hide in plain sight", as it were.
I know this took away a lot of the "secret ninja" aspect of the Turtles. However, to my way of thinking, having the ability to walk around in public didn't remove the ability of the Turtles to do the whole ninja thing -- I mean, they can still hide in shadows, scale buildings at night with their climbing claws, and fight with their ninja skills -- they just don't HAVE to all the time. They have more options now.
I'm not going to say that one approach is better than the other -- I can only say that for ME, the approach I took was the one which made doing Volume 4 interesting enough to me that I was willing to take the time and effort and money required to produce it.
As for my writing/plotting style -- you are correct in saying that it meanders. The way I am writing Volume 4 is quite possibly -- maybe even quite likely -- not what people expect from most comics, or most popular entertainment, which has exactly the "conflict-building tension-climax-resolution" formula that you describe. It may have a lot to do with why Volume 4 doesn't sell all that well. But the fact of the matter is that this is the way I want to tell this ongoing story. I am not interested in writing comics the way Kevin and I used to write the Turtle series. Those were fun stories, and some of them even hold up, I think, as good comics. But I am simply not interested in that approach for Volume 4. I fully understand that this approach is not to everyone's taste, and that I have lost readers who want what the old books were like. I regret that I can't provide that for them. Basically, it comes down to this -- if people want me to write a TMNT comic, Volume 4 is what they are going to get. I'm not going to do a series like Kevin and I used to. I don't want to. I have no interest in doing that. This is the form which currently pleases me.
This is why I have said, a number of times, that if you haven't realized after reading, say, a dozen issues or so of Volume 4, that it is not and very likely never will be like a traditional comic or like the comics that Kevin and I used to do together, I don't know how to help you. It's why I have said several times in the letters column of Volume 4 that if you don't like the way Volume 4 is going, STOP READING IT!!! They say that madness can be defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. I have tried to make clear that this is the way I want to do Volume 4. If you like this approach, I am happy to have you as a reader. If you don't, I regret to lose you as a reader, but that's life.
I have tried to satisfy the types of readers who aren't interested in my Volume 4 approach by reviving the "Tales of the Turtles" series. I think a lot of very good work has been done in that series, with most of the issues being stand-alone stories. It's possible in the future that Mirage might publish a new, Volume 5 if you will, Turtle series which might be more like the old Volume 1 -- an ongoing continuity, but told with stories that run in short arcs, ranging from one to four issues. There are no plans to do so, but it's a possibility. But I can pretty much guarantee that it will never happen with Volume 4, and I am prepared to accept the consequences.
I hope this has been helpful. -- PL
Yo Peter,
I plan to go back and re-read Volume 4 this week.....I'm curious to see how I think it pans out a second time without the 4 month or more wait between issues.
Maybe, like TV on DVD, it'll gell better when all the issues are read back to back. With a 4 month or more wait, this could be another reason people are loosing interest in V4.
For instance, I like the Super Mutant Raph idea, as well as Battle Nexus Shredder. I don't care much for Leonardo and Mystic warrior and mini Don, if only because it doesn't seem like Don's story is going to go anywhere last I recall...
I didn't care for Mike makes alien babies, if only because the Regenta character was an annoying ass...but I do find the 'mike alien warrior' an interesting idea... It's been so long, I'm starting to forget the finer details...
I've got some reading to do :)
PL said:
"I have tried to satisfy the types of readers who aren't interested in my Volume 4 approach by reviving the "Tales of the Turtles" series. I think a lot of very good work has been done in that series, with most of the issues being stand-alone stories. It's possible in the future that Mirage might publish a new, Volume 5 if you will, Turtle series which might be more like the old Volume 1 -- an ongoing continuity, but told with stories that run in short arcs, ranging from one to four issues. There are no plans to do so, but it's a possibility. But I can pretty much guarantee that it will never happen with Volume 4, and I am prepared to accept the consequences. "
I have been loving both volume 4 and tales, but the volume "5" idea you just mentoned would be something i know a lot of fans would also love to see. i always see people on message boards that want to get into tmnt comics but are looking for something with a more conventional format.
PL said...
"I wanted to set up a situation where the Turtles could begin to interact with the larger world in ways they had not been able to previously. Having aliens land on Earth and establish a public presence seemed to be a good way to accomplish this -- giving the Turtles the ability to "hide in plain sight", as it were."
Just some observations about Vol #4.
Truthfully, I was never really big on the "turtles as outcast", it just never resonated with me as a hardwired core concept, sure they may have been shown to be a bit forlorn at times, but I was glad they never obsessed over it.
But as for interacting and discovering the around world them, expanding the regular cast around the turtles beyond Casey and April, and exploring this aspect in depth would have been ideal, having aliens land seems to have jumped over a lot of this exploring, and the world the turtles are interacting with is vastly different from the one they used to live in and from the real world.
It may have a lot to do with why Volume 4 doesn't sell all that well. But the fact of the matter is that this is the way I want to tell this ongoing story. I believe Vol 4's biggest stumbling block is the frequency of its publication, even die hard Mirage fans can't sustain interest in a book that has had one issue released over the last 3 years. If you don't mind me asking, why are there such huge gaps between issues, even in the case where the books are written and drawn?
"It's possible in the future that Mirage might publish a new, Volume 5 if you will, Turtle series which might be more like the old Volume 1 -- an ongoing continuity, but told with stories that run in short arcs, ranging from one to four issues. There are no plans to do so, but it's a possibility."
Could Tales be switch to this type of format?
"Dragon Turtle said...
I believe Vol 4's biggest stumbling block is the frequency of its publication, even die hard Mirage fans can't sustain interest in a book that has had one issue released over the last 3 years. If you don't mind me asking, why are there such huge gaps between issues, even in the case where the books are written and drawn?"
It's simple, really -- it's all my fault. I just have not been inspired enough to do the work required to complete the books and get them out more frequently. ""It's possible in the future that Mirage might publish a new, Volume 5 if you will, Turtle series which might be more like the old Volume 1 -- an ongoing continuity, but told with stories that run in short arcs, ranging from one to four issues. There are no plans to do so, but it's a possibility.""
Could Tales be switch to this type of format?"
It's a possibility, albeit an unlikely one. -- PL
"Kevin "Jester" McGill said...
Originally I thought I disagreed completely with you, Mr. Laird (can I call you Peter, or Pete or is that too informal) but after reading your last bit about the time travel aspect of the movie, I actually agree with you."
All of the above are fine by me. This is a pretty informal place, I think. -- PL
Peter-
Thank you so much for your in-depth response! I certainly understand how writing the same scenario for the same characters for 25 years now would make one want to change things up a bit. I think I can better appreciate Vol 4 for what it is now. It sounds to me now like something I'd call a sort of easy-going meander (there's that word again), taking your characters through situations and events that interest you. Almost like a stream -of-consciousness or free-form style. Probably *is* a lot of fun to write!
You know, I'll still keep buying and reading Vol 4. Despite my grumbles, my sentimental attachment to the Turtles wouldn't let me do anything else before, and now I've got a better understanding of how and why it's unfolded as it has.
And as you say, Tales has continued in the "traditional" story-telling style and I've enjoyed every issue of that very much.
Plus the prospect of a Vol 5 as you've described it
has me kind of bouncing in anticipation. I really hope that becomes a reality.
PL said..
I hope this has been helpful. ***
More than you can know. I can't tell you how much I appreciate the opportunity to express what's been on my mind *and* get a clear idea of your perspective in response.
Thank you!
~Donna
-->> Donna, what is " OK " in your mind regarding Volume 4.
Break outside of your frustrations for a friggin' moment and tell me something good , PLEASE !!
And i'm saying and asking that as your compadre !! !!
PL said...
"It's simple, really -- it's all my fault. I just have not been inspired enough to do the work required to complete the books and get them out more frequently.If you don't mind me asking, what is the cause of this lack of inspiration? You seem passionate about the turtles in terms of the cartoon shows, movies, and in general, but that passion seems to be missing from the comics. This puzzles me, especially since Vol 4 seems to be such a personal project of yours.
~ tOkKa said...
-->> Donna, what is " OK " in your mind regarding Volume 4.
Break outside of your frustrations for a friggin' moment and tell me something good , PLEASE !!
And i'm saying and asking that as your compadre !! !!** * ** ***
Well, after getting the low-down from Peter I think I'm looking it as sort of a different art form. In my "Inner Turtle World" it's kind of an AU, and that's okay cuz I can appreciate it for what it is.
Tok, you did read what I said after Peter responded, right?
~Donna
-->> ..yes i did , D
"Dragon Turtle said...
PL said...
"It's simple, really -- it's all my fault. I just have not been inspired enough to do the work required to complete the books and get them out more frequently.If you don't mind me asking, what is the cause of this lack of inspiration? You seem passionate about the turtles in terms of the cartoon shows, movies, and in general, but that passion seems to be missing from the comics. This puzzles me, especially since Vol 4 seems to be such a personal project of yours."
I'm not really sure. It's probably a combination of things, including a little Turtle "burn out", just getting older and consequently having less energy, and so on. Just to be clear -- I haven't done any significant work on the movies or cartoon show in quite a while, either. -- PL
PL said...
"I'm not really sure. It's probably a combination of things, including a little Turtle "burn out", just getting older and consequently having less energy, and so on. Just to be clear -- I haven't done any significant work on the movies or cartoon show in quite a while, either. -- PL"
How was the experience working with Kevin Monroe and Lloyd Goldfine, do you think such collaborative efforts could transfer over to the comics with people such as Murphy, Talbot, and Berger?
You mentioned in the past that you were not interested drawing comics, do you really enjoy inking/toning the books? Wouldn't it be easier on you to have someone else do this?
And have you considered adopting a scripting style such as giving an actual panel count per page and telling the artist what you want shown in each panel,with dialogue written to a finished, or near finished state. As opposed to the 3-4 page story treatment approach?
"Neil said...
Peter, What would be the need for the right to publish it? The only thing I can see needing that for is once you two had settled out differences, you'd want to post the final 'cease fire' agreement for everyone to see. Other than that, what harm is there in not getting permission to post it online?"
Neil, the only reason that I wanted the freedom to publish it -- either online or in the comic -- is that I didn't want a situation to arise (and it is certainly not without precedent) wherein Rose would take it upon herself to shoot her mouth off in some online forum or mailing list, grossly misrepresenting what I'd said in our private correspondence... and I would have no good way to correct that misrepresentation, i.e. by showing the actual words exchanged.
Along these lines, I am still waiting for Dawn to confirm that the email that she was referring to when she posted this:
"I've heard and seen many a time when he's been rude to fans, sometimes warranted, but sometimes seemingly for no good reason. Without getting too far into it, I'll say that I had one of the latter experiences a few years ago when I relayed to an email group something Kevin Eastman told some of us about the franchise. It wasn't anything harmful in any way, and I was only sharing information with other fans, but Peter (whom I had never met nor conversed with) sent me an email ripping me apart. I was quite shocked and upset, and I admit that kind of jaded me a bit."... is the same email that I found in my records. If, in fact, it is, I plan to post it here, because I think it would surprise people expecting to see something vicious and eviscerating. So Dawn, once again... can you confirm? -- PL
Been reading this for a while now, and feel like I gotta give my tuppence..
I for one, absolutely love vol 4. I aint one for writing huge reviews, or putting my arguments forward very well, so i'll do it in my own way. (Also, i'm paraphrasing what seem to be the biggest 'nitpicks' of vol 4.)
!)"The turtles aren't hiding in the shadows, outcasts in a human world" If the Utroms were out there, and with all that technology, why wouldnt they come to earth to extend a helping hand? The coming of them felt like a very natural progression of the TMNT books to me. Also, its a book where superhero types, aliens and magic were introduced pretty early on - not very much set in the 'real world' I would say..
*)"There's not enough Ninja Action". Fair enough, not as much as there used to be, but there's been a fair few fights that I can see. Also, the Foot's been pretty much wiped out - and Leo's in the Battle Nexus!
@) "The turtles aren't a team anymore."Looks like they were all staying in the same place in the first few issues of vol 4, but since the utroms' arrival are doing their own things. This really a bad thing? How many of you folks still live with your siblings, hanging out with them day and night? Do they really need to be in each other's pockets all the time?
&)"The stories drag out with no ends being tied up." I really dig this kinda storytelling - its totally different from anything else out there at the moment. Much more realistic also, you get different threads opening up in real life all the time, and nothing ever gets resolved in what would be a "three issue arc". I do agree that it is quite hard to get into, picking it up too late, and feel that trade paperbacks would be all the more welcome, to get more folks aboard..
I wonder to myself how many people would be complaining if vol 4 was still the turtles, living in the sewers with Splinter, only having a couple of human friends, fighting the foot, month in, month out. Sure, it would be pretty cool for awhile, but would start to get pretty stale after awhile. I think folks would be calling out for something different, complaining that there is no progression in the stories, been there, done that.
Which is why I love vol 4. Its different from the norm, its progress. And Tales' singular stories work all the better for this...
Peter--I was trying to leave well enough alone by just dropping this whole thing. No, that's not the email I was referring to, but unfortunately, although I kept that email for a VERY long time, it finally got lost. I do wish I had it still because I would send it to you privately so you could see what I had issues with. Since I can't do that, I would rather not try to recreate it here and put words in your mouth. I don't believe in posting things publicly that are meant to be more of a one-on-one kind of thing, which is what it seems to me Rose takes issue with. If she has the courtesy to send you a letter/email/whatever in private--regardless of whether it could be considered badgering on your part (and maybe even especially if it is), I think it's only right to respect her back by not publishing it. That's the very reason I never shared the email from you that upset me so much--because I wasn't trying to slander your name in public.
!@#$
-->> TOOKIE !! SUCH LANGUAGE !!
X}
"Dawn said...
Peter--I was trying to leave well enough alone by just dropping this whole thing. No, that's not the email I was referring to, but unfortunately, although I kept that email for a VERY long time, it finally got lost. I do wish I had it still because I would send it to you privately so you could see what I had issues with."
Well, as Dana Carvey's "Church Lady" character from his days on "Saturday Night Live" might say -- "How conVEENient!" "Since I can't do that, I would rather not try to recreate it here and put words in your mouth."
Yes, it's probably not a good idea to try to recreate something like this -- especially when it is quite possible that it never existed. But now I guess we'll never know, will we?" I don't believe in posting things publicly that are meant to be more of a one-on-one kind of thing, which is what it seems to me Rose takes issue with."
Perhaps... but apparently you don't mind talking about this alleged email and making claims based on what you say was in it which amount to a type of character assassination."If she has the courtesy to send you a letter/email/whatever in private--regardless of whether it could be considered badgering on your part (and maybe even especially if it is), I think it's only right to respect her back by not publishing it."
In normal discourse with people who can be trusted to not misrepresent what one says, you would be correct. I don't believe that applies here."That's the very reason I never shared the email from you that upset me so much--because I wasn't trying to slander your name in public."
That's a somewhat ludicrous statement, especially given that a few days ago you posted here your slanderous description of my alleged intent in the alleged email, and your alleged feelings of being "ripped apart" by my allegedly terribly cruel comments. Something doesn't compute here. -- PL
Wow, talk about a total un needed reply, peter. I took Dawns note one way, probably the way she intended it to be, and from an outsiders perspective you totally went on the offensive for no apparent reason that, again an outsider can see..
My first thoughts after reading your reply? That was totally uncalled for on your part.
Sigh, it really is a shame when so many negative things are now concerning the first franchise that made me really want to create something of my own...Why bother when it might turn out like this?
"Neil said...
Wow, talk about a total un needed reply, peter. I took Dawns note one way, probably the way she intended it to be, and from an outsiders perspective you totally went on the offensive for no apparent reason that, again an outsider can see..
My first thoughts after reading your reply? That was totally uncalled for on your part.
Sigh, it really is a shame when so many negative things are now concerning the first franchise that made me really want to create something of my own...Why bother when it might turn out like this?"
Neil, you are of course entitled to your opinion. But let me ask you this -- if you had a blog, and someone posted something akin to the following (and this is copied directly from Dawn's comment):
Sarah--I'm not sure how you know what Peter's "typical" response to fans is when all you really have access to are the things he wants you to have access to. I've heard and seen many a time when he's been rude to fans, sometimes warranted, but sometimes seemingly for no good reason. Without getting too far into it, I'll say that I had one of the latter experiences a few years ago when I relayed to an email group something Kevin Eastman told some of us about the franchise. It wasn't anything harmful in any way, and I was only sharing information with other fans, but Peter (whom I had never met nor conversed with) sent me an email ripping me apart. I was quite shocked and upset, and I admit that kind of jaded me a bit. Still, after I got over that, I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt."
... essentially accusing you of being a vicious, rude jerk based on some email you allegedly sent her years ago... and then when pressed, this person can't find (or SAYS she can't find) the email in question, how would you feel? So you are left with trying to defend yourself against -- what? There is nothing you can point to and say "That wasn't me" or "I didn't say that".
Let me be frank -- as painful as it might be to me, if I did write something crappy and hurtful like that, and have somehow forgotten about it or blocked it out or whatever, I want to know about it. I try to not do stuff like that. I'm not always successful. But in this case, (a) I have no memory of writing a scathing email to Dawn, and (b) I can find no record of it in my email archives (and I keep ALL of my email relating to the Turtles), and (c) it doesn't even make any logical sense, given what the email was allegedly about -- correcting some factual misstatement of Kevin's.
Is it possible that I somehow lost this email? Yes, it is remotely possible... I've had a few "hiccups" with AOL mail from time to time... but from my perspective, it's HIGHLY unlikely. In any event, isn't it the responsibility of the "plaintiff" to provide evidence supporting the complaint? I would like to think that if I had the gall to post these kinds of accusatory statements on someone's blog, I should have some solid evidence to back it up (as solid as an email can be). -- PL
Maybe it's just me....and I'm reading things the wrong way. But based on what she wrote, and what you wrote, you totally went off the wall in your response and it was 100% un-called for.
Dawn was trying to say, 'forget I ever mentioned it..I made a mistake in doing so', as I read it, correct me if I'm wrong, Dawn.....and you start seeing red.
As a fellow fan who hates to piss anyone off, I would have done the same thing. kept a letter for a long time, wondering what the hell I typed out that upset the person so much, and then after finally getting tired of wracking my brain worrying about something that happened in the past, boom, deleted it and hope to start fresh. In fact, I did almost exactly the same thing when I thought I somehow pissed off Pat Fraley and fretted about it for years.....having OCD only worsened it.
That's how I took that note. A simple little reply that meant no real harm.
If you feel people are going to be attacking you left and right, perhaps it's time to take a 100% break and let people with a fresh mind, perspective and ideas take the reigns and the company into a new direction rather than lashing out at fans.
And just to clarify, this is the internet after all. This is not meant to be a bashing post. This is just how I interpreted these notes after reading this entire goofy thread....your opinions may vary....
Neil (still trying to be the nice devils advocate, but loosing faith...)
Peter, the email exchange in question did happen. I can't remember the details either (hey, I'm older than you; I get a pass on memory lapses) but I do remember Dawn posting something Kevin had said on a mailing list and then later forwarding me the response you sent her.
She didn't post your email publicly anywhere but she did share it with me; she's my friend and she was upset. She felt like one of her heroes had jumped down her throat over something minor. I do recall thinking your email seemed harsh and definitely "out of the blue".
No, I don't have it either; it was on my old jps acc't which I dumped when gmail was born.
I don't mean to dog-pile on this but please don't imply that Dawn made it up. She didn't. Dawn is one of the most hard-core, die-hard loyal TMNT fans I know, and after ten years in the online fandom, I know a lot of people. She only mentioned the exchange in response to something Sarah had said, and has since expressed that she's sorry she even brought it up.
It happened, but it's probably best left as water under the bridge.
~Donna
Why is it uncalled for, though? Dawn makes a claim, Peter wants proof, and Dawn doesn't make with the proof.
- Andrew Modeen
"devilbanex said...
Why is it uncalled for, though? Dawn makes a claim, Peter wants proof, and Dawn doesn't make with the proof.
- Andrew Modeen"
Andrew, thank you for the succinct summing-up. That is it in a nutshell. -- PL
Neil said...
Maybe it's just me....and I'm reading things the wrong way. But based on what she wrote, and what you wrote, you totally went off the wall in your response and it was 100% un-called for.
Dawn was trying to say, 'forget I ever mentioned it..I made a mistake in doing so', as I read it, correct me if I'm wrong, Dawn.....and you start seeing red.
As a fellow fan who hates to piss anyone off, I would have done the same thing. kept a letter for a long time, wondering what the hell I typed out that upset the person so much, and then after finally getting tired of wracking my brain worrying about something that happened in the past, boom, deleted it and hope to start fresh. In fact, I did almost exactly the same thing when I thought I somehow pissed off Pat Fraley and fretted about it for years.....having OCD only worsened it.
That's how I took that note. A simple little reply that meant no real harm."
Neil, I get the feeling that Dawn is a friend of yours. Am I right?
I ask because I think you are cutting her far more slack than you would if she were NOT a friend of yours.
Re: the 'forget I ever mentioned it..I made a mistake in doing so' bit... I used to have a friend who did not have very good skills in dealing with people when things got difficult (as they will, from time to time, in all relationships). Instead of confronting the issue at hand and working it out in a grown-up fashion, he would instead take out his anger and frustration by repeatedly insulting the person to his face... and then smiling and saying "Just kidding!"
That's what I see Dawn as having done here. She says something offensive, then says "Forget I mentioned it!" and expects us all to move on, while her offensive comment just sits there like -- to use one of my favorite Jerry Seinfeld lines -- "a big matzoh ball." (That's not an exact quote from Dawn, but I'm using your words, which I think describes her move quite well.)"If you feel people are going to be attacking you left and right, perhaps it's time to take a 100% break and let people with a fresh mind, perspective and ideas take the reigns and the company into a new direction rather than lashing out at fans."
Where the heck did THAT comment come from?! My head almost spun completely around from the force of that non-sequiteur. I could just as easily say that it's time for some fans to quit whining and take responsibility for their nonsensical bomb-throwing. -- PL
-->> Dawm, Donna and Rose are some of my best friends ..
i'm still very confused by wgat is happening .
~ tOkKa said...
-->> Dawm, Donna and Rose are some of my best friends ..
i'm still very confused by wgat is happening .** **
Ever blurt out something you didn't really intend to? And then there's no way to un-say it?
That's what's happening.
~Donna
"GreenWillow said...
Peter, the email exchange in question did happen. I can't remember the details either (hey, I'm older than you; I get a pass on memory lapses) but I do remember Dawn posting something Kevin had said on a mailing list and then later forwarding me the response you sent her.
She didn't post your email publicly anywhere but she did share it with me; she's my friend and she was upset. She felt like one of her heroes had jumped down her throat over something minor. I do recall thinking your email seemed harsh and definitely "out of the blue".
No, I don't have it either; it was on my old jps acc't which I dumped when gmail was born.
I don't mean to dog-pile on this but please don't imply that Dawn made it up. She didn't. Dawn is one of the most hard-core, die-hard loyal TMNT fans I know, and after ten years in the online fandom, I know a lot of people. She only mentioned the exchange in response to something Sarah had said, and has since expressed that she's sorry she even brought it up.
It happened, but it's probably best left as water under the bridge.
~Donna"
Donna, let me see if I've got this right -- Dawn, who is apparently very concerned that I respect the sanctity of my private "conversation" with Rose, seemingly has no problem with sharing my private email correspondence with you? Perhaps this concern for privacy is a recent development with her. I wonder if she forwarded it to anyone else? If so, maybe one of them has this alleged evil email somewhere on his or her computer.
If you want to know what my gut feeling is, I don't think she made it up. I think she WILDLY overreacted to the only email I can find that I sent her on this matter, a missive which I think any objective observer would find TOTALLY innocuous and not an attack of any sort. I would love to post this one (and I may at some point)... it would, I think, make for a very instructive object lesson.
I will continue my search for this mystery email, but unless I (or you, or someone else from the Circle of Green) find something that fits Dawn's description of the email I allegedly sent her, I'm calling this one bogus. -- PL
She shared it with me because that's what friends do. In this case yeah, I'd say Dawn's need to process what felt to her like slap in the face trumps your anonymity. But then it wasn't like your email got broadcast *all over* the "Circle of Green", either. (I kinda like that...) If it had, someone by now would've dug it up because this has become a rather closely watched conversation.
~Donna
And now for a tremendous blanket statement. Those of you who I am not speaking to will obviously know it.
You people have no tact. And even if you have no respect for Peter (which obviously some of you don't), please have some respect for the rest of us by not endangering the rich community resource that is this blog.
It is only because Peter chooses to write here that this blog even exists. And I personally am shocked he hasn't turned comments off already.
Remember how awesome a resource Steve Murphy's 5th Turtle blog was? Well the fandom went and F-ed that up but good with this EXACT same behavior.
And at the end of the day what will you accomplish? Further alienating yourself from the co-creator of the brand you love? Peachy. Totally worth it. Carry on.
I have never been so ashamed to be part of this community in my life.
Shame on you.
-Stephan
Peter:
I woke up at 3am last night and read only the last paragraph of your reply to me, and the reply to others.
Am I mad at you? no. Am I trying to be mean? No. But if you thought my reply was off the wall, that's how I read your comment to Dawn, being a total outsider on whatever might be going on between you and fans you might be having problems with.
As I see it, Dawn wrote something while in the heat of the moment, clicked on the send button, and in all such instances, instantly regretted it. Now she sees someone she idolizes trying to dredge that back up instead of doing what she's trying to do...letting it go.... Again, as an outsider NOT trying to bash anyone up and seeing both sides of things, that's how I and I alone saw your reply and wrote what I Wrote. Adding to that, you yourself said you where getting tired of the daily grind due to age and lack of enthusiasm, if I remember correctly. Maybe if you took a break from it all, relaxed on a beach somewhere for a few weeks with no computer or TV to distract from it, and came back and read some of your replies you'd see them in a different light, perhaps?
After this post, I would also love to see Sarah's (I believe it was) in depth look at fandom. It's been most interesting to see how everyone follows this thread and reads the replies....and how they perceive what's been written.
Oh, and stephan. Murphy's blog was shut down due to one fan, mostly. Armmaggon. Just like Peter, Murphy doesn't mind a good discussion, even when it goes down to this level. But that 'fan' was just trashing left and right dragging others down with him, and that's when he started getting tired of things. As you can see here, I am just pointing out facts as I see them. I'm not swearing my head off, typing in all caps, posting ill menacing words or meaning anything with malice. I'm just replying as I and I alone see things...
That said, I'm taking my own, and someone elses advice. Have fun here guys, I'm off blogs for a while.
"Neil said...
Peter:
I woke up at 3am last night and read only the last paragraph of your reply to me, and the reply to others."
Neil, should I take that to mean that since 3AM last night you still haven't read my entire reply to you? If so, I encourage you to read the whole thing."Am I mad at you? no. Am I trying to be mean? No. But if you thought my reply was off the wall, that's how I read your comment to Dawn, being a total outsider on whatever might be going on between you and fans you might be having problems with.
As I see it, Dawn wrote something while in the heat of the moment, clicked on the send button, and in all such instances, instantly regretted it. Now she sees someone she idolizes trying to dredge that back up instead of doing what she's trying to do...letting it go...."
Have you ever heard that expression "You can't un-ring a bell"? That's what Dawn is attempting to do here. I will try once again to express why this is aggravating. Dawn posted a comment -- read by however many people read the comments on this little blog -- in which she took me to task for being rude to her for no good reason, by writing an email to her which ripped her apart. I don't particularly like being described that way. Now, some of the people who read that -- maybe most -- don't know me, and have never seen this alleged email. Their opinion of me is likely to be colored, negatively, by this description. And it's a description which, given the nature of the Internet, is in some sense never going to go away. The bell that she rang can't be un-rung.
What makes this especially difficult is that the alleged offending email has -- somewhat unbelievably, in my opinion -- somehow vanished from Dawn's records (and those of Donna, to whom Dawn copied this alleged email). This leaves, as the only "evidence" of the alleged nasty qualities of the alleged email, Dawn's summary description of it. The email can not be read by anyone now, so that they could make up their own minds about whether I was being a jerk to an innocent fan. (Actually, it is my current belief that the email in question DOES still exist, and it's the one that I found on MY computer... the one that I described in a previous post as being "a missive which I think any objective observer would find TOTALLY innocuous and not an attack of any sort.")"That said, I'm taking my own, and someone elses advice. Have fun here guys, I'm off blogs for a while."
That's unfortunate, Neil. I hope you come back. -- PL
" GreenWillow said...
She shared it with me because that's what friends do. In this case yeah, I'd say Dawn's need to process what felt to her like slap in the face trumps your anonymity. But then it wasn't like your email got broadcast *all over* the "Circle of Green", either. (I kinda like that...) If it had, someone by now would've dug it up because this has become a rather closely watched conversation.
~Donna"
That's one explanation, Donna. Another one -- much more likely, in my opinion, given the evidence I'd been able to piece together -- is that the alleged email DID get spread around further, and the only reason no one has spoken up and posted it is that the alleged email IS, in fact, the one that I found in my records, which I described in a previous comment as "a missive which I think any objective observer would find TOTALLY innocuous and not an attack of any sort." And anyone who might have it, being a friend of yours and/or Dawn's, is hesitant to post it lest it make the two of you look -- at the very least -- incredibly thin-skinned. -- PL
Having read through this thread, I'm afraid I must agree with Stephan.
What was originally just a personal review of Star trek has basically become a court case against Peter as creator/participator of this franchise. And it's creating a real nasty blackspot on the fandom.
I'm usually very leery of blogs, just because of things like this. I watched the whole death of Murphy's blog, and I for one do NOT want to lose the chance to speak with Peter here, whether I agree with him on things or Not.
I talked to Neil a bit, and I'll say it here as well.
The atmosphere here is becoming too toxic. I think Everyone in this thread needs to stop, step back and take a breather for a few days...
...but that's my two cents.
~Amy
-->> ..good idea, Mach.
In time .. all this may heal over.
As Donna tells me herself..
This too shall pass.(( Gee, i just quoted GW .. oi wow )).
-->> .. geez
Anthony said...
Wow, Peter. I've never seen a more severe case of "Little Man" syndrome. Ever."
Really? "Ever"? Don't get out much, do you?"Did you really just let one person's opinion bug you so much that it sent you in to this pissy little tirade? Really? Guy to guy here, nut up man. Let it go. Has it ever stuck you that outside of your little bubble of a world that you might be wrong?"
Absolutely. In fact, it's something you would have seen if you'd read what I've written here carefully, instead of just dismissing it with "snappy" lingo."Sure everyone else might be wrong too but consider that fact that you, Peter Laird, might, actually, be, wrong. If not, fine. Happy days for you man. But what's with all the drama? An opinion is just that, an opinion. They're just like a-holes, everyone has one. But keep dragging this out and calling people out by name and the only a-hole standing out in this crowd will be you. Let it go."
Dude, if you can't handle the stress and strain of a disagreement among adults (and it's a disagreement you're not even involved with), then you probably shouldn't be reading this stuff. "Nut up", indeed. -- PL
-->> Mr.Laird's point is proven.
Wow Anthony,
It is amazing the garbage that will spill from people's mouths when they don't have to be held accountable for their words huh? You don't even publicly display your profile. The internet has bred an entire generation of cowards.
-Stephan
This is the problem with the TMNT fan community as a whole. The majority are really good folks. Nice people who share a common passion for a unique little property.
There are however, a few fans who feel at some point that the franchise betrayed them. They complain about, EVERYTHING, from the movies to the toys, to the day to day goings on at Mirage, most of which they know a minimum about at best.
They speculate, fuel rumors and constantly hassle the guys at Mirage, Playmates and anywhere associated with TMNT.
Unfortunately for TMNT fans, these voices are the loudest. These same people have ruined a dozen other interactive TMNT venues and often destroy threads on forums with their constant negativity and bickering.
The constant quest to "save" TMNT from Laird is the most asinine logic on the planet. Personally attacking the man, the business or the property is ridiculous. Laird never did anything to any of you, at worst he produced some things you didn't like and at best he provided you with hundreds of hours or entertainment.
Get over yourselves, either enjoy the TMNT property as it is, or get lost.
There is no harm in some critique or a few simple suggestions, but the actions of a few are constantly ruining it for the many. Those of you who do this are vicious, self centered and downright ignorant.
Mirage, TMNT, Playmates and Laird don't owe you ANYTHING. You didn't build them. You didn't make them. The masses did. Your singular complaints are outweighed by the masses of people who still very much enjoy the TMNT property for what it is, complete with any and all flaws it may contain.
Thanks for all you do Mr. Laird and I appreciate you putting up with the nutcases.
Well, if Peter doesn't like the fan's comments, he doesn't have to read them...
"W.Peabody said...
Well, if Peter doesn't like the fan's comments, he doesn't have to read them..."
Wendy -- it is Wendy, right? -- I can't tell if this comment is a subtle, slightly tongue-in-cheek joke. If it is, it's kind of funny.
If it's not... sigh...
... are you seriously saying that I shouldn't be reading the fan comments on my own blog? The whole point of doing this thing was to open up a conduit for communication with the fans. To not read, and occasionally respond to, the comments would seem to defeat the purpose of this kind of venue.
I truly hope you were trying to be amusing and are not serious in your statement. -- PL
"Newton Gimmick said...
Thanks for all you do Mr. Laird and I appreciate you putting up with the nutcases."
Thank you for the kind -- and refreshing -- words, NG. -- PL
171 comments is a lot to read, so I've skimmed in some places, but... What in the world?! I feel like I've gotten off the wrong stop on the subway and ended up in crazy town.
Listen to you. Most of us should be all adults here. Instead, these petty arguments and flinging of insults is remiscient of four and five-year-olds. Unbelievable.
What does Star Trek have anything to do with Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? Tell me, because I'd like to know how and where you thought either of the two are connected. Enlighten me because I don't see it.
Peter has the right to say, on his blog, anything he wants to. He is entitled to his opinion just as you are to yours, but you must show respect and agree to disagree if you can't see his opinion; how grown adults should act.
As far as the Turtles, ultimately Peter can decided what the hell he wants to do with them. It's his creation, but he gracious enough to let us interact in that world. He's a good man and he's human. One can only take so much vile backlash over and over from some of the same people with good grace before it starts to wear them down. It comes to a point where enough is enough, and I couldn't say I would blame him for dishing it out just as hard from some of the comments I've seen on here. You ought to be ashamed of yourselves. It makes me almost ashamed to be part of this fandom.
While I love the Turtles, I don't like all of their universes, but guess what? I take the adult way and not bother with it. I don't go to hunt down and savagely attack the creator for destroying my childhood. I don't like it, I don't take part in it. It's that simple. Shocking, isn't it?
One thing I have liked I didn't think I would was Volume 4. I've come to appreciate it for what it is. I think it's gone places for the Turtles and the characters that necessarily hasn't been done before. It's an interesting take on them.
While I would love Donny and Raph reverted to normal, I can deal with it. I know it's for the sake of the story, and Peter probably has plans anyway to get them back to normal before the end of the comic. I know some of you write and this is really no different.
I think what some of us need to do is step away for awhile, take some time to think it over, and then come back when we are in a lot calmer and rational state of mind. Because this has gotten completely out of hand.
I am starting to think this comment section is approaching the point of diminishing returns (some might argue it reached, and passed, that point some time ago). I am considering shutting it down -- not turning off comments entirely, just deleting any new comments posted after a certain date (perhaps a few days from now).
Before I do that, I have a few more questions to ask of Dawn, if she is willing to answer them.
First, back in 2001, were you using multiple email addresses? I have done a search through my old records for any email with "dawn" in either the address or content fields, and I have only come up with the emails I have already described.
(Actually, that's not entirely true, I think -- I would have to scroll back up this long list of comments to see if I had already mentioned this, but I did also find an email from you after I sent you the one about the factual errors... and you THANKED me for correcting you. Hard to see that as the response of someone who has been "ripped apart".)
Also, would you prefer that I post those two emails on this comment section, or should I just make them available privately, via email, to anyone who asks (now that we know that you are okay with sharing private emails with third parties)? The former would be easier for me and others, but if you would prefer the latter, I'm fine with that. Just so you know, I am going to do one or the other. I'll wait a few days, and if I don't hear anything from you, I will exercise the latter option.
Thanks to everyone who had anything interesting and/or constructive to say in this Brobdingagian comments section.
FYI -- I will have more to say about "Star Trek" movies, both old and new, but that probably won't be for a few weeks. -- PL
Wendy -- it is Wendy, right? -- I can't tell if this comment is a subtle, slightly tongue-in-cheek joke. If it is, it's kind of funny.Yes, it's Wendy. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, based on what you had said in the past about people not liking some of the issues of TMNT, That if they don't like them, they don't have to read them, which personally speaking put me in a dilemma on whether I should keep paying for books sight unseen, since they were on my order list at the local comic shop. I could have refused them, but I'd have to read them first... hence the dilemma.
And to put this more back on subject, (have been watching ST series since 1964) I think I'll see this new Trek movie on Netflix. :)
This will be my last post here, period, just so you know. I keep trying to just let this be and end what has turned into a rather dramatic argument between quite a few people. Peter, you asked me what I would prefer in regards to you sharing that email you're talking about. It doesn't matter to me either way. Again, it's obviously not the email I was referring to, so if it's a nice interaction between the two of us, that will be a refreshing change. Share it as you see fit. After all, even if I wanted to, I couldn't stop you.
As I said before, I never shared the email in question "publicly". I shared it with a really good friend because I was confused and upset, and I wanted to get her opinion. If that constitutes "publicly" in your book, then so be it.
And just for the record, I'm not a vindictive person. Why the heck would I have ever decided to just make up some crazy email all those years ago, and make false claims that you'd gotten upset at me when at the time, you're someone I really looked up to? It would make no sense, and the people who know me know better.
In any case, I'm letting this drop here and now. I've tried before, unsuccessfully, since it seems like you don't want to let it go, but I'm going to unsubscribe from the comments, so if you don't hear back from me again, that's why. And before you say it, no, I'm not trying to "run away". I just know when something has been beaten into the ground a million times. And if I don't block the comments, it seems like it'll never end.
If it makes you feel better, you can continue to call me a liar, and "thick skinned" and claim that I'm slandering you. I know the truth, and so do the people who actually know me.
I never meant for this to turn into such a war, but it's been very enlightening. Good luck with your blog and your future endeavors.
Wow. I came back to this thread a week later to see if anyone else bothered to leave a comment or two. Turns out, I haven't been able to do a lick of work in the last hour and a half. Good grief!
PL: Unless it was more stuff along the lines of "your writing sucks and Jim Lawson's art sucks", I think I'd be interested in hearing it.
Pardon the tangent, but who in their right mind thinks Jim Lawson's art sucks? It's not the first time I've heard reference to such statements, but it still blows me away. Dude is amazing! And now, forgive me for daring to return to the Star Trek thing...
PL: What Abrams has done is essentially wipe away pretty nearly ALL of pre-existing "Star Trek" continuity and history -- I think it adds up to something between 300 and 400 hours of stories (and that's if you're just counting TV shows and movies).This is interesting. I think it was somewhere on this blog that I made a mention of you going back and changing early issues of the TMNT comic, and attempted to articulate that some fans felt it essentially messed with the property they know and love. Your response, if I recall correctly, was something to the effect of, "I fail to see how that changes anything. Those books are still there." That's a loose paraphrase, I'm sure, but isn't it essentially the same scenario? Aren't those movies and episodes still there for you to enjoy? No one paved over them, or wrote them out of continuity. If anything, I'd be inclined to say that what J.J. did is less of an alteration, only because those early TMNT books were changed (and to be clear, I take up no issue with you going back to alter those early issues; You shared with me in that blog post your reasons for doing so, and they are ones I can relate to in terms of my own work. I mention it only because it is interesting to me that you feel this way about one, and differently about the other). Assuming he never picks up an old printing, a new reader entering the TMNT world with recent reprints will never be privy to the original look of the book (a friend of mine is actually in this exact scenario, and wants to own the work as originally published. He asked me last week if the new Collected trade features the "remastered" versions or the originals, a question I'm curious to have answered as well, if you would be so kind). Now, before someone mentions it, yes, I realize we're talking about different kinds of changes, but they are both changes nonetheless. But this new Trek film moved the franchise forward without ever wiping anything old away. That's what made it work (and I am a ST fan, BTW). We didn't go back in time and see old events erased; those old stories happened, and they remain part of continuity. At any given time, the Kirk that had trouble with Tribbles could pop up, because he still exists. We're still moving forward in time, and this movie is just but one more crazy event in the ST universe.
Sorry, I had to break this up into two posts because it wouldn't take for some reason... Part 2:
Sarah The Anime Librarian: My main point being that there really isn’t a comparison between the two as Gene is dead and had no say, where Peter is not and the changes are in line with what he's chosen to his own property.
What (Pete has) chosen to change about the turtles is like a man who has come up with a wonderful milkshake recipe deciding that after all these years he’s going to change the flavor of the ice cream and throw in some blackberries. You may love the new one, you may hate it. But its his. What was done to Star Trek is someone else taking the same recipe for a wonderful milkshake that man spent his whole life making and changing the ice cream flavor. I think I've seen this comparison once or twice in this lengthy (but stimulating) discussion, and I felt I should point something out. You can't compare Pete/TMNT to Gene/Star Trek. Despite its origins, Star Trek is a Paramount property. As such, Paramount changing the flavor of its milkshake is no different than Pete changing the flavor of his.
gogreenmachine:I have never been so ashamed to be part of this community in my life.
Really? Not even during the COOTS era? I kid, I kid. But seriously, aside from a few points made that seem to miss the mark of what the conversation was about in the first place, and a couple of rude comments (some coming from sources that weren't really part of the conversation to begin with), I feel quite the opposite (but then, I'm one who enjoys a healthy debate). It's been quite an interesting, and at times very heated, conversation, but I really enjoyed reading what people like Peter, GreenWillow, Sarah The Anime Librarian, Dawn, and Newton Gimmick have contributed here. I love seeing fans articulate their thoughts (particularly when they do it quite well, I might add), and it pleases me to see a creator whose work I admire allow them to do so on his own public forum.
Wowza!
I can not believe this Rose Peter and whomever else thing is still going on.
I had some beef with things going on at Mirage but I dropped them, as I've got my own life to live that more important.
Perhaps some people just need to get lives.
Volume 4 is not the best thing Peter's ever done or Jim nor will I say it's the worst.
Like I told Peter when I got to meet him in NYC, I've been here from the start man I'm going to stick around for the ride no matter what direction it may take me.
Some times I have to wonder if people freak out about TMNT changing so much because they are getting older and feel that anything besides what they want to see is time wasted.
I'll be open with Peter, my only gripe about Volume 4 at the moment is that it takes so long to get a comic out that I want to see move forward so badly.
I've been very vocal in the past about a number of things and many I didn't know a thing about besides what I had been told or seen, or heard one side of a story.
Many times I feel into a mob mentality attacking people I really didn't know, will I say sorry?
No, it's to late for that and the people I hurt without realizing didn't act mature in professional manner as they should have asking why I did what I did or even letting me know I hurt them.
Some times we act cruel without thinking about it because to us it's funny after all we're all just humans with countless emotions many good and bad.
The thing I've been the most vocal about though has been Playmates Toys and I still stand by my thoughts on them and that they really no longer know what to do with this property.
Good for Peter if he doesn't like this new Star Trek movie btw, honestly who cares?
I don't really care for Star Trek in general at all, everyone want to make a big deal out of that?
I think it's great people are being so open with their thoughts including Peter, but the attacking on both sides is uncalled for and it always has been.
We can all talk like adults here and respect one another even if we don't always see eye to eye.
I get into arguments with Stephan & Tokka quite often many times over really pathetic things but at the end of the day I still consider them friends.
Some times you just have to let yourself go and stop thinking in the mind set that you can do no wrong and everything you say is right and everyone else with a differing opinion is and idiot (wrong).
But if everyone was like this we wouldn't have so many wars and blood on our hands now would we?
-Vaughn M.
@Alex:
I'm just so tired of the needless mudslinging and witch hunting under the pretense of being a fan. I think some people have completely forgotten how to be fans, and they are destroying their own fandom. It reminds me of the crusaders attacking their own cities in the name of their cause.
@Vaughn:
Indeed, you and I have had some of the most fierce debates thats I have ever been involved in. We are both very passionate, and neither of us are afraid to tell the other when we think they are wrong. The difference is that as fierce as we are when arguing, we are even fiercer friends. That is what makes for good debate. Being able to stand up for what you believe, and at the end of the day, remembering that our friendship means more than any of this. A number of people could stand to learn a lesson from this.
I've said it to Stephan and Amy, and I feel I have to ask it as a blanket statment here and now: How many of you would say these things to the late Jack Kirby? Or Stan Lee? Or Allan Moore? Or Frank Miller? or any other creator of a comic book franchise you enjoy? I may not agree with Peter Laird (or Kevin Eastman) on some of the things they do, or the directions they take with the Turtles, but I'm just a fan, they are the creators. Now yes, if not for the fans TMNT as a franchise would die, but if the fans cause the creator to "burn out" then the franchise is just as dead.
I posted something along the lines of "Why doesn't Peter see the fans of TMNT's frustration as similar to his distaste for Star Trek?" but now I see that Pete has succinctly spelled out his problems with the franchise, but never stooped to personally attacking Abrams. There's where it differs. Can't we respect the man for what he did. He created the frekin' Turtles. Something we all love passionately...but not that passionately...in most cases. Please stop the insanity.
"How many of you would say these things to the late Jack Kirby? Or Stan Lee? Or Allan Moore? Or Frank Miller? or any other creator of a comic book franchise you enjoy?"
Back in the days of the Comics Publishers Forum on Compuserve in the late 90s, plenty of notable people in the comics industry took a great deal of flack from the public. Peter David seemed to be the target du jour at the time. At least until he stopped taking the bait, anyway. No one in any industry is exempt from criticism and trolling. I'm not trying to justify trolls, just adding a little perspective. That's all.
(Note: This comment will be in at least two parts, as Blogger won't let me post in in one big piece. -- PL)
Dawn,
Although you may not see this, I'm going to try to lay out in as coherent a fashion as possible exactly how I see what has happened.
In a response to one of Sarah's comments here, you made a claim that, years ago, after you had "relayed to an email group something Kevin Eastman told some of us about the franchise", I had sent you a shocking, upsetting email "ripping you apart", in what you describe as me being rude for apparently no good reason.
This baffled me, as -- although I did have a vague memory of a brief email exchange with you about some misstatements by Kevin -- I had absolutely NO memory of savaging you in any of those few emails. I went back to my email archives and did a search. I found two emails pertinent to this issue. The first was one I sent you, back in July of 2001, with the heading "Clarifications".
In it, I corrected some of the factual errors you had made in your email to that email group, and gave you my perspective on some areas of TMNT history where I disagreed with some of the things that Kevin had said.
Not long after that, I received a short email from you beginning with "Boy, do *I* fell like a total idiot now!" and ending with "Thank you very much for setting things straight."
As far as I can tell from what I was able to find in my records, this was the sum total of our email discussion about your post to that email group regarding the comments made by Kevin. It was a polite exchange, as far as I can tell. Nowhere in it -- either in my comments or in your agreeable reply to them -- do I see anything capable of "ripping apart" someone.
Now, you claim that this is not the email that you are referring to -- that it was some OTHER email that "ripped you apart". Unfortunately, you ALSO claim that now you can't find that alleged email. And your friend Donna, with whom you shared this alleged email, also can't find her copy of it. So where does that leave us? I have a record of emails between us -- you do not. The emails I have generally fit the description of the subject matter you mention in your comment on this blog ("...something Kevin Eastman told some of us about the franchise"). They fit my vague memory of the exchange. One email follows the other email in a logical fashion. I believe the preponderance of the evidence favors my side of this dispute.
(Continued in next comment...)
If you were to ask me what I think may have happened to lead you to the conclusion that in July of 2001 I had sent you an upsetting email "ripping you apart", here's my current theory: Eight years ago, seemingly out of the blue, you were startled to receive an email from the co-creator of the Turtles (me) correcting some statements you had made in an email to other Turtle fans. You were somewhat embarrassed to be caught in a mistake like this -- even though it really wasn't your fault, as the mistakes and errors actually came from Kevin and/or the garbling of what Kevin might have said to the person who then relayed some of the information to you. Thus, even though you emailed me back with an apology and a "mea culpa", you still felt some kind of negative vibe... maybe you even felt trapped, like "Should I pass on these corrections to the email group? But then I'll look like a dope to them! What do I do?" etc., etc.... and this bad vibe evolved over the years, festering inside you, until it became, in your memory -- eight years after the fact -- what you now describe as feeling "ripped apart".
But that's just my theory. I freely admit it could be wrong. Regardless, the available evidence shows that I never sent you the alleged savaging email.
By the way, I never called you "thick skinned"; I called you "THIN skinned". I also didn't call you a liar, though it may be implicit in my refutation of your attack on my character.
Also, re: this comment:
"As I said before, I never shared the email in question "publicly". I shared it with a really good friend because I was confused and upset, and I wanted to get her opinion. If that constitutes "publicly" in your book, then so be it." I looked back though my comments and could find no mention of accusing you of sharing the email publicly, so I don't know why you are trying to make this point.
I'm glad you feel this has been "very enlightening". To some extent, I agree. I would suggest that a key bit of enlightenment to be taken from this protracted exchange is this: "Never 'open a can of worms', especially if you don't have the evidence to back you up."
(And as a corollary, maybe "Never make reference to an email you no longer possess.") -- PL
Jebus freakin' cripes! Why is this even an issue? How did a post about how one man felt about a movie turn into a witch hunt? This makes me nauseated.
Anyone else tired of the new troll (or, quite possibly, old troll in new "clothing") "Anthony" yet? Yeah? All right then... time to take out the trash. -- PL
Peter -
Probably late in the game. I took a few days break from this thread, had a great friday working for a local radio station, and came back to it with a semi fresh perspective of not having looked at it for the past few days.....
A bit of an apology is in order on my part, after reading your other reply that I wrote at 3AM. It may have sounded a tad harsher than I intended it to be.
But after re-reading your full reply instead of just the last paragraph, a posting of Tristans on the board, and just getting tired of all the fan hatred coming out of this thread....that lead to this note :). It's amazing how fast people ignore you just by doing something you think is right :).
But on the whole, I still think this whole thread got way out of hands on both sides. Maybe it's time to just delete those whole thing and start fresh.
Add on:
I still stand by my statements of comments that could have been worded better on both sides :)....I'm not going back on trying to defend Dawn when she wanted to drop the whole scenario.....
But things could have been nicer put on both parts :)
"Neil said...
Peter -
Probably late in the game. I took a few days break from this thread, had a great friday working for a local radio station, and came back to it with a semi fresh perspective of not having looked at it for the past few days.....
A bit of an apology is in order on my part, after reading your other reply that I wrote at 3AM. It may have sounded a tad harsher than I intended it to be.
But after re-reading your full reply instead of just the last paragraph, a posting of Tristans on the board, and just getting tired of all the fan hatred coming out of this thread....that lead to this note :). It's amazing how fast people ignore you just by doing something you think is right :).
But on the whole, I still think this whole thread got way out of hands on both sides. Maybe it's time to just delete those whole thing and start fresh."
No apology necessary, Neil. Good to have you back. -- PL
Personally, I saw the movie twice in theaters and a friend somehow gave me a copy of it. My real first name is Scott; named after the original character.
I do not feel the movie was was bad as it could have been. For starters, with these new trend of classic sci-fi and horror movies being restarted, there seems to be a lot of unnecessary sex. We only saw one scene with Kirk. That was a lot less than I was expected to see with this new James Kirk.
By creating this new alternate reality of Star Trek in a pocket of time and space, it gives Star Trek a new chance to not be as campy as it used to be.
However, I am not here to debate on if this was a great movie or not. I do not understand why the flame war was started. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. While I may not like certain directions Peter has taken TMNT in the past and perhaps recently, it's still his to do with as he pleases. And we as consumer fans to this, we are allowed to have our own feelings. But to have a flame war? It just reminds me of why I stopped getting involved in the fandom. As a former admin to MikeysTMNT and a user at The 'Drome, it's a little hard to want to read posts when people are fighting. I am guilty of being part of it.
So, with that said, check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QyYaPWasos - Not Safe For Work.
Anyway, Peter, is there anyway TMNT could be marketed the way Playmates pushed out The Terminator and Star Trek toys? Seriously, 3 different sizes of all the characters and so much random junk in the toy stores... yet all I can find are the Anniversary Turtles - and maybe 2 pegs of them at best.
As their longest running toy line that made people aware of who and what Playmates is (besides whatever Hefner claims they are), and we've been desperately waiting for some new molds and toys to be out.
Have a good Memorial Day Weekend.
That's for anyone who reads this. Life's too short for fighting - and the economy is enough stress as it is so let's not fight over Turtles and Trekkies. ;)
-Scott aka Slash
Scott :: ..former admin to MikeysTMNT..-->> Far as i know, Scottie m'lad ..
you are free to beam back into that Mikey's TMNT forum at any time to resume admin duties at any time.
But i do understand there are some new challenges in your life now so.
:)
"Slash said...
Personally, I saw the movie twice in theaters and a friend somehow gave me a copy of it. My real first name is Scott; named after the original character.
I do not feel the movie was was bad as it could have been. "
Scott, I absolutely agree with you there."For starters, with these new trend of classic sci-fi and horror movies being restarted, there seems to be a lot of unnecessary sex. We only saw one scene with Kirk. That was a lot less than I was expected to see with this new James Kirk.
By creating this new alternate reality of Star Trek in a pocket of time and space, it gives Star Trek a new chance to not be as campy as it used to be. "
It's funny -- I never saw "Star Trek" as "campy"... at least not as I understand the word."However, I am not here to debate on if this was a great movie or not. I do not understand why the flame war was started. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. While I may not like certain directions Peter has taken TMNT in the past and perhaps recently, it's still his to do with as he pleases. And we as consumer fans to this, we are allowed to have our own feelings. But to have a flame war? It just reminds me of why I stopped getting involved in the fandom. As a former admin to MikeysTMNT and a user at The 'Drome, it's a little hard to want to read posts when people are fighting. I am guilty of being part of it.
So, with that said, check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QyYaPWasos - Not Safe For Work.
That's pretty funny."Anyway, Peter, is there anyway TMNT could be marketed the way Playmates pushed out The Terminator and Star Trek toys? Seriously, 3 different sizes of all the characters and so much random junk in the toy stores... yet all I can find are the Anniversary Turtles - and maybe 2 pegs of them at best.
As their longest running toy line that made people aware of who and what Playmates is (besides whatever Hefner claims they are), and we've been desperately waiting for some new molds and toys to be out."
Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? I don't think so. I don't really know Playmates' plans re: the Turtles, but I suspect it is possible that they are making a big push with the "Terminator" toys because they think they can sell a lot of them while the film is in theaters. Will they still be making "Terminator" toys twenty years from now? Somehow, I think not."Have a good Memorial Day Weekend. "
Thanks... and the same to you! -- PL
Amy, Stephen, Thank you. Its kind of comforting to know I’m not the only one looking at this from a certain angle. One does not have to have others to see their point of view, but god is it nice!
Just got back from working 5 days in the Guest Relations department of Anime Boston, and it was very odd for me. I sat in on panels and heard fans speak and it made my head spin that some of what I see wrong here, is reflected there as well. I suppose I should find it comforting in a weird way that what, in my opinion, is the toxic part of fandom is present in ALL fandom, and not just one. No, really it’s not all that comforting. It’s really kind of sad.
I look forward to the future Star Trek blog you refer to... I'd love to rap with you a little bit about Trek, as I suspect you and I kind of see eye-to-eye on the whole matter. Could be wrong.
- Andrew Modeen
Post a Comment