What makes it different from others?

The movie's only flaw is also a virtue: It's jammed with characters, stories, warmth and laughs.

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

I remember seeing this movie several times before, and I seem to enjoy it for some strange reason. I think it's a fitting end to the trilogy. Yes, it's not a great movie, but I don't think that was its purpose. Part III shouldn't be taken too seriously as it seems to gracefully end the series in a good note. I found part III more enjoyable than part II, but that's just my view. What I did like about part III was that it took a different approach - totally!! the story or plot was completely different compared to the first two movies, and I don't think it has connections to the other movies either. It actually would've been great, though, had the two sequels not been made as the first movie was simply a cult classic!!! The first movie along with the anime series were amazing. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles was fabulous back then; in fact, it was so fabulous that I got obsessed with having Pizza whilst watching the turtles in action. I have to thank the turtles for my love in pizza. If you are a fan of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, you would enjoy watching it otherwise you won't. I think it's a good movie to end the series.

This is an OK sequel to the first Ninja Turtle movies, but not as good as the first two though. The plot kind of didn't make sense and most stuff in this movie was fake. One part in this movie that really didn't make any sense was that Splinter could sense danger through time. How could Splinter even do that? Also that kid that Michelangelo saved from that burning house in 17th century Japan, his name was Yoshi as in Hamato Yoshi, Splinters master who we saw in the flash back of the first Ninja Turtles movie. They never explained it in this movie though cause the turtles didn't even mention anything about the boy to Splinter. Also what's with Michelangelo having a love interest in this Japanese woman when he had a crush on April O Neal in the first two movies? Also I could've sworn that that Samurai warrior who was sent into the present that that woman was his sister, but I'm wrong about that part. He was actually in love with her. Also I could've sworn that Anthony Hopkins was the main villain in this movie, but it's just some other actor who kind of looks like him and Anthony Hopkins played the infamous Hannibal Lecter. Also for the villains demise we see him fall down to a watery grave and the splash effect in that scene was totally fake cause we didn't actually see himself go into the water. We just see him disappear like magic with the sound of a splash. Also what's with the time traveling thing and the whole mythology thing about the turtles being demons or gods being there to fight an army long ago? That also doesn't make any sense cause the turtles were just house pets once and then turned into teenage mutant ninjas after crawling through a radioactive ooze. This movie sort of has a kick to the first two movies but not as good as the other 2 though. OK but not that good.

This movie concluded the trilogy of the original TMNT movies, where the turtles were stuntmen in costumes. It wouldn't be until over a decade later where we'd have a new TMNT movie in 2007, which is also called TMNT. I saw the 2007 TMNT movie once, and didn't like it. Then, there'd be a 2014 Michael Bay TMNT movie with Megan Fox as April O' Neil, and a sequel for that movie is in the works. It was a cool action movie, but a lot of us prefer the original TMNT movies.This movie is probably the most forgotten next to the 2007 movie. I've also seen bad reviews from this movie, both on IMDb and critic reviews. But, despite those bad reviews I love this movie and am going to give it a good review. This movie for one takes us in a different direction than the other two movies. How so, well we are used to seeing the TMNT movies showing the turtles in an urban environment and in sewers. It also looks different to see a TMNT movie without The Foot Clan, Tatsu, and Shredder. In this movie, the turtles and April travel back in time, and rather go back to like the time of the dinosaurs, they go back to Feudal Japan in the 17th Century. The scepter they use to travel back in time was cool.I've read reviews on this film, specifically on Wikipedia where one of the reviews stated that they felt like the movie would only appeal to kids, and not only that but looked like it was written by a kid. I have to say, definitely not. Here are some of the reasons. Well, I feel like most kids are not familiar with Feudal Japan in the 17th Century. This movie takes us back to Japan during that time, and I feel like they do a great job in brining 17th Century Japan back to life. You could watch this movie, including the trailer and in scenes the turtles aren't in, you'd think you were watching some other movie showing ancient Japan as we see the turtles in a different environment. Also, I could easily summarize the plot for the first two movies, but this one is harder to summarize. A kid wouldn't write a plot that was hard to understand for such a productive movie. I also feel like it could appeal more to adults than those other movies for a few reasons. One, I think if you're like me and like history it would be interesting seeing Feudal Japan. Also, this movie seems a little less cheesy, as the way the turtles act can be cheesy at times, but in this movie they seem a little more mature than in the last movie. This movie also seems dark which was a complaint for the first movie and toned down in the second. The turtles finally use their weapons again. This is also the only TMNT movie of the original trilogy with guns. We can ask ourselves, why if the Foot And Shredder intended to kill the turtles, why don't they ever use guns? We also have cannon usage. This movie also includes Casey Jones who wasn't in the second one. He plays two different parts in the movie, so it's great to see him back. Let's not forget about the humor in this movie. Then again, we also see more nature in this movie than any other TMNT movie.So, I saw this movie yesterday and really enjoyed it, more so than the second. I feel like this movie is underrated. If you think like I do, then this movie will definitely be enjoyable to you. It does a great job in taking the movies in a different direction and making an enjoyable movie different to what we typically see. So if you haven't seen it, I'd definitely recommend it.

Yeah, it's the worst one in this Ninja Turtles trilogy and it is a bad movie. However it wasn't as super awful a I thought it was going to be. Some of the parts are just plan out stupid though and it seems to go in a certain direction but completely disregards it. And a lot of things just doesn't make any sense. The villains were silly and goofy in the previous installments, but this take it to another level. To the point it actually become really annoying to watch. So this time the turtles comes across a magic scepter that allows the turtles to go back in time to feudal japan. And few samurais in the past to make it to present time. And it become pretty much predictable and straightforward from then on. With the turtles siding with the a group driven by rebellion against a tyrant and his men, including a arms dealer who is basically the main bad guy. And the turtles has 60 hours to do there thing, get the scepter back and make it back to the time period they belong in. The thing is, this seemed more like a live action Ninja Turtles TV show from the 90's over it actually seeming like it's a movie. Even the turtle costume this time looks super plastic looking and appeared to be a left over costumes from Chuck E. Cheese. The previous 2 installments are lame and cheesy, but this one becomes appalling even if it's a kids movie. Like I said, it isn't a super awful movie but the pointless scenes revolving Casey and uber weak character development and interactions equipped with directions and scenarios that doesn't make any sense really hurts this one. Fortunately at least the actress that played April O'Neil is much better than the one in the second installment. Despite most of my review being negative about this movie, the reason I say it's not super awful is because it does have few although very few parts that are decent. However it's a major negative when the audiences can think of ways to make the movie better than the actual writers, probably within the budget as well. And I usually don't make statements like that, because I am not a Monday morning quaterback. But the audiences even have some better ideas. 3/10