Talk:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990 film)

Mostly positive reviews
I removed the line in the introductory paragraphs that stated "The film received mostly positive reviews," because as evidenced by the 46% on Rotten Tomatoes, it didn't receive mostly positive reviews.DaddyTwoFoot (talk) 20:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * You might be correct that it didn't receive mostly positive reviews (I'm just saying it's possible... I don't know), but Rotten Tomatoes is not a good evidence of this. Reading over WP:MOSFILM, it's clear that the Critical Response section should emphasize the critical response at the time of the film's release. It also calls out the problem of review aggregation sites not providing this. The film came out in 1990. None of the Rotten Tomatoes reviews are from before the year 2000. --Elephanthunter (talk) 04:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Country house
Doesn't the country house belong to Casey Jones' grandmother, and not April like the article insinuates?

Actually, I think I remember reading in the very first issue of the comic that it belonged to April's grandparents.


 * I think you are correct, but I'll find out for sure before I change it.PrometheusX303 07:10, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It's April's. She makes a few comments about how long it's been since she had been there.  Plus, she knows her way around (including the distance to the nearest neighbor), where Casey does not. --UsaSatsui 09:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * In the 2003 cartoon, the turtles frequent Casey's grandparents' farmhouse. The house in the movie is not the same.  --Brandon Dilbeck 06:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah dont use the 2003 as a refrence though. I dont trust it. It's all about the original Turtles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.167.52.195 (talk) 16:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC).


 * Thanks. I no longer have a copy og the film, or I would have checked.  Prome  theus  -X303-  06:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Was it the Foot that initially attacked April? PrometheusX303 07:10, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It's never stated. Though the gang robbing the van meets the description of the Foot (teenagers robbing electrical equipment), there's no definite connection.  --UsaSatsui 09:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

"Medium" Versus "Media"
The phrase, "Leonardo is usually accepted as the leader of the group ... in all TMNT medium," has been repeated twisted around today, especially back and forth between the words medium and media.

Medium is a singular word, and media is plural. Since there is more than one type of TMNT medium (comics, movies, cartoon series), we should be using the plural word--media--to be describing the scope of the TMNT material. It's the same case with data and datum or the case of criteria and criterion.

Alternatively, we could use the word continuity or canon, seeing how the songs lyrics aren't very canonical with the rest of the film.

It isn't that I don't like the words medium or media, it's just that I didn't want to have to type all of this out in the first place to explain my change in the first place.

--Brandon Dilbeck 03:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * First, medium and media are not the same thing, only distinguished by singular/plural tense. Medium describes the different forms of artistry, media describes entertainment. Depending on how you are addressing the statement will depend on which word you use. In that form, the word medium is correct, because you aren't refering to TMNT entertainment, you are refering to the other TMNT forms. You would use "media" when you are talking about entertainment in general, but with that statement we are talking about the different forms of "media" that the Turtles inhabit, and in that case the correct word is "medium". It's like painting, for example. Painting itself is a form of media, but the specific areas (i.e. oil paints, water colors, charcoal) are mediums of painting. Bignole 11:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, Brandon is right on that point. According to Webster, the plural form of "medium" when used in this sense is usually "media" (definition 2b). Consequently, I've taken the liberty of changing it back. -- Ritchy 13:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * No where in that definition does it state that media is, by definition, the forms of artistic expression. It says that media can be used a plural to medium, but, if you read, it also says that there is a plural form of medium, and that is mediums. No definition stated that media is the correct usage when you are applying it to this statement. When you say in all forms of TMNT media, you are using it incorrectly. The word is medium, because in this statement using media changes the definition of the statement. It's English 101, when you change the tense of a word you change the meaning. MEDIA is a general word that describes all forms of entertainment, medium is the specific word that describes certain types of entertainment. Sorry, but you are wrong. Here, let me help http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium, TMNT falls under "mass media" because as a whole it is mass media. But, when you are discussing the individual forms of this "mass media" it falls under "a means of artistic expression" (i.e. the medium of comics, the medium of films, the medium of animations). Like I said, as your statement stands the correct word to use is MEDIUM, but, if you were bright and that hung up on using media then you were reword your statement.
 * Let me point it out for you; "in all TMNT media" is what you want it to say, but, that is incorrect because you can't have "all" media, because media is a general term that describes ALL types of entertainment (when using it in this subject matter). If you want it to be correct then you have to either remove the word "ALL" or get over it and let the word "MEDIUM" correctly stay where it belongs. Bignole 15:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Images in deleted scene section
I took out two of the four images in that section. Four is probably far too many to be considered fair-use in one section, and it was cutting up all the text and so on, and looked very cluttered. Davey4 12:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

This is the only website I can find which confirms there were deleted scences from the movie Dwanyewest (talk) 00:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Plot
I think we should try and shorten the plot section a little. As it is right now, its far too detailed. Davey4 05:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Why? If anything detail it more to explain to people who aren't familiar with the subject.Dwanyewest (talk) 00:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, the plot section is supposed to be an overview, right? If someone wants the details, they can watch the movie. Pillarsofsalt (talk) 03:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Goofs
I'm gonna delete the goofs section. I can't recall ever seeing a goof section in a movie article before, and it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. DurinsBane87 09:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Article standards
Just because other articles have features doesn't mean they're good ones. We should be using FA movie articles as a reference, and Jaws (film) certainly doesn't have a goofs section OR a cast and crew section. DurinsBane87 18:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Further FA examples are Blade Runner, Gremlins, The Boondock Saints. If the cast section remains, it should be formatted like the cast section in V for Vendetta (film) and Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

None of these sections have a goof section, goof sections belong on IMDB. So i'm at least getting ric of that.DurinsBane87 18:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Goofs and the such should go to trivia, if really needed. Too much trivia should be avoided. Cast should be given as per film style guidelines, ie: *Actor name as Role. Hoverfish Talk 20:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Production
The creatures were first made out of fiber glass, which were then rebuilt out of clay. I'm sure that should be the other way around but when I changed it it changed back, any thoughts? Oh also fiber should be fibre.--203.59.107.145 01:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems ok when I type it in manually so it must be a problem with copy and paste.--203.59.107.145 01:10, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Fixed inaccuracies
I have fixed the following inaccuracies in the plot summary:


 * The film version of Casey Jones was an ex-hockey player, not a martial artist, and was not a "friend of the Turtles" at the beginning of the film; he didn't even know about them until he crossed paths with Raphael. Having removed the incorrect "friend" reference, I have made alterations to the text in a few places to explain Casey's actual role in the film.


 * Danny, the boy who tells Shredder that the Turtles are at April's, was not "related to April", he was the son of April's boss. - Pennyforth 19:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Another one... in the Cast description, Donatello is described as being 'the brains of the Turtles', while in the film there is no evidence to support this (unlike the original cartoon series). In this film, Donatello actually has very few distinct personality traits other than being a less 'extreme' version of Michelangelo.Robbmonster (talk) 15:23, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Why a Bath Tub?
Has anyone ever wondered why Raphael is in a partially filled bath tub at the farm or why April sprinkles some water on him in one of the scenes? I'm just guessing but aren't the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles turtles, if I remember right my teacher said turtles were reptiles, meaning you don't have to keep them wet all the time like a frog. Of course if they really are frogs and I've been completely mislead that would explaind Donatello's comment in the third movie "I think I swallowed a frog. I sure hope it wasn't an ancestor."

Fair use rationale for Image:Raph and Don Deleted.jpg
Image:Raph and Don Deleted.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I think they were trying to revive him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.234.68 (talk) 01:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Non used ending.jpg
Image:Non used ending.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

People 1990 article
Here's an interview Judith Hoag did with People Magazine following the release of the film. Sarujo (talk) 14:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Current Showings on movie channels and ABC Family
Current showings of this movie on ABC Family and on various movie channels have cut out two scenes

1) The scene in which the two kids who are visiting the Foot hideout are offered cigarettes - This I can understand as part of the movement to discourage kids from smoking.

and

2) The argument between April and Casey in which Casey gives April the message from Charles about being fired. - This I do not understand why it was cut, except possibly for time constraints.

Good thing I still have the original video. LReyome254 (talk) 01:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

David Chan
Someone has linked and identified the producer of this film to the concertmaster of the Metropolitan Opera. I'm pretty sure these are two different David Chans. Can anyone verify who is the David Chan who is one of the producers of this film? kosboot (talk) 12:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, a quick glance at IMDB shows that it's an entirely different person. The IP address 138.217.65.168 keeps wikifying it, but it is NOT the concertmaster of the Metropolitan Opera. kosboot (talk) 12:24, 3 December 2014 (UTC)