Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/15/2018 in Posts

  1. 19 points
    I'm sorry you like to make arguments without having any knowledge of whether they are true, then? Anyway, I think this thread, which has been nothing but back and forth between everyone on this forum and two members for the past 3 dozen pages, has run its course for the time being. When there's actual news to talk about instead of just a shoutfest between the rest of SSMB and people who seemed to have accepted restitution from Paramount pictures, we'll open it back up.
  2. 13 points
    I was really hoping you'd give me a better argument than screen time and role means less realism is needed in a live action movie as that is one of the shallowest arguments anyone could have given and undermines the question of whether or not the teams involved in their respective movies have any faith in their ability to sell something unbelievable to the audience. But even as shallow of a response as you provided you then just had to go and add on to that and effectively tell me that this movie truly is a faithless adaption. Don't see it? Let me explain by requoting you. With this line you have said that Sonic's iconic design is for comic relief only, unappealing, and that he is incapable of being expressive and relatable which flies in the face of the franchise persisting for twenty-seven years with a very loud and creative fanbase that constantly talks about how Sonic has influenced their lives and/or how they are able to relate to him be it by projecting their own problems onto him or legitimately relating. But it doesn't stop there. You have managed to clarify why those involved with the film and all of the film's defenders constantly bring up movies starring humans, humans, and more humans and continuously fail to ever tell us to think Sonic; it's because all of their successes are movies staring humans so it's all they know how to do. They don't know how to tell a story and make an appropriate movie starring an impossibly fantastical entity and thus have elected to make him human in every way possible because it's what they know best and they have no faith in themselves to be able to sell a truthful vision of the character and his universe, that they have no faith that the franchise and source material can sell on it's own, and that they have no faith that the audience will buy a faithful adaption. They have no faith in themselves, the franchise, or the audience. With this one line you have managed to convince me that this movie is being made with all of no faith, the very definition of a faithless cash-grab. Frankly that sucks, because the Sonic franchise is my favorite and it somehow manages to push back my depression which is probably why I want to give this movie a chance. It's likely why I keep interacting with you, the movie's biggest defender here as you seem to possess a genuine love of what this movie is selling, but with that one line you have managed to make yourself look more like a troll than someone who actually does love it that much. And don't come at me with your typical well he needs to be a human being to be relatable to the general audience argument because that is a inherently wrong, or have you somehow missed the title character of Detective Pikachu during our exchanges. In case you haven't noticed he's a rodent who looks like a rodent and even moves around like a rodent and is treated in universe as anything other than human. Yet despite that, in one singular trailer they have shown us that they want us to relate with him, not by discarding everything and anything about Pikachu, but by showing us his feelings and short comings with well written dialog and blatant examples. We know from the trailer that he is alone and suffering from feelings of loneliness and has no where to belong even with his fellow Pikachu's but as no human's understand him either he is completely isolated and experiences joy at meeting someone who understands him. And that Mr. Mime scene you said is only for comic relief, well for a scene taken seriously in universe according to trailer and highlighting Detective Pikachu's pride and short temper as character flaws that get the better of him I find it hard to believe that scene is purely for comic relief regardless of the presence of noodle limbs. It shows that the Detective Pikachu team has faith in their ability to sell a non-human product, that they have faith in the franchise and source material to be successful, that they have faith that the general audience will buy their story regardless of the absurdity of the concept. That is in start contrast to the Sonic movie team who has no faith in their product, no less you who in their attempted defense has managed to sound like IGN when they said that Sonic was never good. And if you don't see that you claimed that Sonic as he was designed is unexpressive and unrelatable, and that he can't succeed without a grossly unnecessary "realistic" redesign let me quote you again. Yet, despite your absurd claim, here we are over 27 years after this franchise was created on a forum dedicated to, made by, run by, frequented by, and for fans of this very franchise that apparently is not expressive, relatable, appealing, or capable of being successful without a live action Hollywood adaption that ignore everything but the most basic of aspects of the franchise, it's history, and what makes it loved in the first place. I love this franchise and would have loved to see it represented on the big screen but that isn't happening and you have just told me that it shouldn't due to not being relatable, expressive, appealing, and capable of succeeding as what it has already succeeded as. So at this point either your wrong, a troll, or I'm a meter tall hedgehog from another dimension where Sonic is real. If that sounds absurd then you might want to reevaluate your argument but because that is how absurd it is coming across. And frankly, I hope you do, because I love this franchise and want to give this movie a chance and I don't believe that your are a troll, but rather that your passion that you have demonstrated so far is genuine. Give me a reason to believe and give this movie a chance. Stop telling me to think about human starring movies about human stories, and how directors,writers, and producers who specialize in human everything can't sell me a movie about a meter tall anthropomorphic hedgehog without turning him into a human being as well. Stop trying to sell me on a Sonic the Hedgehog movie by telling to think about and weigh as evidence everything but Sonic the Hedgehog. Don't tell me Sonic can't succeed as he has for 27 years because it tells me that you as well as the production team has no true faith in this franchise or movie. Give me a reason that, I, a fan of the source material all the way down to and most especially the design of Sonic the hedgehog for 27 years can have to give this movie a chance.
  3. 11 points
  4. 8 points
    That's a false equivalence. Sonic =/= Marvel/DC. Besides, did you forget CapAm's hilarious costume in Avengers 1? Spiderman may not wear a "purple polka-dotted lycra suit with yellow lenses", because as far as I'm aware that has never been his costume design. He's always worn a red and blue suit, and guess what, he wears a red and blue suit in literally every live-action movie he's in. Irrespective of how stupid it looks. And speaking of "market research" you are aware of the movie Space Jam right? A live-action movie with actual cartoons in it, which grossed $230 Million in 1996. Ah yes, there is also this one movie which did something similar called Who Framed Roger Rabbit which grossed $330 Million in 1988 (which is $700 Million in today's money, adjusting for inflation). You act like a cartoon in a live action simply cannot work, when it has quite literally been done before, and to massive success at that. Ah but of course, times change so maybe those films wouldn't be as popular today. I am willing to concede that, but you missed my point anyway. Why does the film need to be Sonic in the real world? Why must it be Live action? What is the need? The existence and apparent success of the Smurfs and TMNT and them being popular isn't really good enough for me, because neither of those movies were well received critically. And even though they were relatively successful; grossing around $500 Million each, neither of those movies can even begin to touch the critical reception or even commercial success of say...The Incredibles ($633 Million in 2004, inflation adj. $ 850 Million) or The Incredibles 2 ($1.241 Billion in 2018). I could list a fair few other Disney or Pixar productions in recent years that absolute shit on Live-action movie adaptations. I know you keep saying those films are for kids, like that's somehow a bad thing...even though they tell stories with emotional depth hitherto unseen by any Sonic game ever created. And I know you keep comparing this Sonic movie to the MCU, but that is frankly, delusional. This movie is better compared to the likes of TMNT, or Smurfs, cause that's how the average parent who sees posters of it, are going to view the movie. Maybe it will be a success...Maybe it'll break even at the Box office, or more. But that will never change my view that a fully animated film would probably have been better. I don't really like being talked down to in a way that suggests that my dislike of something I view to be bad, is somehow "toxic". Why should I be optimistic? Other movies that took this approach to bringing beloved franchises to big time Hollywood ended up being trash. Sonic's most recent endeavours haven't exactly been up to the mark.Do you expect me to sit down and keep quiet? This is a discussion board after all. A place where us fans can talk about things regarding a franchise we love(d). Not everyone can agree on everything, every time. I reserve the right to remain sceptical of everything I see, and I reserve the right to be critical of things I think deserve criticism. Just as you're free to like what you see, or be cautiously optimistic or whatever. You can even try to change my mind. That's the whole point of a forum.
  5. 7 points
    Well, I will give the movie this much credit. It has done one thing right so far. It united the Sonic fanbase. Not in the way it wanted to, as the fanbase is united in hatred of this movie, but still. I don't think even Sonic Mania managed to bring the fanbase together this well.
  6. 7 points
    Any argument postulating that the design is okay produced from anecdotes of non-fans not being excessively bothered by it seems ill-fated to me. You would think a movie being produced based off an IP (especially such a large and prosperous one as Sonic the Hedgehog) would have a prime motive to appeal to fans of the IP to fill seats. Just about everything we know of this film is pretty much Sonic fan repellent. This isn't a film reviving a brand that has been dead for decades and modernizing it where this sort of choice would be halfway excusable, this is an IP that has been consistently making content since 1991. This series never ceases to make the masses collectively drop their jaws in amazement and disgust. I'm starting to wonder if Sonic the Hedgehog was very quietly taken over by a university research group in the mid-2000s as a method of conducting odd social experiments.
  7. 7 points
    First impressions. Immediate thoughts, gut instincts. Appealing to some tastes, while soured in others. All thoughts and opinions are made in that one tenth of a second, where everything counts. The saying goes: "Make a good first impression," and that's not said for no reason. You are judged based on the appearance that you give off, because once that first impression is made, it defines how others see you. And even behind sihouette, where not even the face is seen, a first impression is still made. The appearance is seen, and it is judged. So we see the Sonic movie poster. In that one tenth of a second, we make our judgement. The appearance tells us all we need to know. If it turns out that we see it as bad... Then the opinion is made. It is bad. After that first impression, I begin to think that this does not feel like Sonic. If it doesn't feel like Sonic, then that opinion doesn't change. First impressions of the design have now been made, and now there's no more to it. The fact that it's in sihouette changes nothing. So I read the plot synopsis, even first impressions there still inspire no confidence. The whole premise on my first impression gives bad vibes. The fact that it's a live action/CGI movie gives bad vibes. Even if there's a talented crew, even if Jim Carrey could play a great Eggman, even if, hypothetically speaking, the story were to be written by Erik Wolpaw, that doesn't change the fact that the human response of first impressions MADE ME THINK THAT THIS DOES NOT FEEL LIKE A SONIC THE HEDGEHOG MOVIE. I don't care that it might look good. Once again, in that one tenth of a second, my opinion has been made. In that one tenth of a second, everyone's opinion has been made. Feelings cannot be changed, it is a matter of natural human responses. "Make a good first impression," they say. If it weren't obvious, this movie had failed to do that.
  8. 6 points
    Oh yes, Roger Rabbit, that delightfully innocent and child-friendly film about racism, oppression, depression, regret, and topped off with a psychopathic toon murderer truly is a innocent story with a light-hearted tone.
  9. 6 points
    So you're selectively choosing to fully believe them on words alone when they say it doesn't look like shit (which we've already seen proof against), but not when they say it looks like the game design (which we have also seen obvious proof against). The final version's body already looks far from cute, it looks disgusting. It is not fucking hard to tell when the bouncy, lanky, cartoon hedgehog that is Sonic is different from the monstrous stiff fuzzy "Sonic" from this movie, even if you're a complete noob to the series. The comparisons they've said "yes it looks just like that" have already been proven to be wrong, so either they're massively misremembering or not trustworthy from the start. If they can't even tell that, why the hell should anyone choose to blindly follow the idea that it looks good in the slightest, when everything that isn't the face already additionally looks terrible anyway? Going off what we know it looks like, everything else about his body looks bad. Given what we've heard, the whole thing supposedly looks good. But the complete failure to recognize what it actually looks like from the people who were there basically invalidates their claims. This is basic shit, and you're peddling this nonsense as some kind of objective fact when literally every single piece of official material we've gotten from the film has lined up with none of it. EDIT: Actually, I'm sure you're going to try and deflect this like you do all criticism of this film and yourself, so I even drew you a diagram to make sure it's as clear and obvious as possible what a broken school of belief this is.
  10. 6 points
    It also doesn't hold any weight. Unless we have confirmed evidence of the regular team giving any more to this movie than a "sure whatever I don't care" I have zero reason to believe any official statements. I mean, they already lied about this "not being like the smurfs", which it definitely is. Why the hell should I trust a "oh they definitely did lots on the movie" from either the people producing the thing who obviously don't care about it or the person blindly defending it and trying to paint anyone who disagrees with him as an unreasonable moron? Especially with how many co-workers of the Sonic group were shocked and terrified (justifiably so) and obviously had nothing to do with it. Unless we get Iizuka being like "haha yeah I definitely made everything about this POS happen" there's no reason to assume it's anything more involved than it happening in the first place, especially with how inconsistent it is with how they've handled other attempts at spin offs and adaptations.
  11. 5 points
    Because your argument is only right if you completely simplify it to the point of explaining it to toddlers or someone who doesn't understand what makes a good movie. You're whole stance, which you've now just admitted is 'Sonic must look realistic, because otherwise people don't like it, look at all other movies to prove I'm right.' So the reason why therefore the Rocky and Bullwinkle movie failed is because the characters didn't fit in with the real world setting? It had nothing to do with the following... The script. The acting The jokes. The plot. Sound design. Costume design. Direction. Cinematography. Editing. Now apply that to any other movie which meets your criteria. It's completely nonsense argument. And even if you were adamant that it was that, I can name a good chunk of movies in which it has worked exactly like that, even to your parody extreme with the 'cartoon artstyle.' It's like how some people think that all you need in a game to make it good is a good story and that Gameplay is a minor thing.
  12. 5 points
    Whenever I see threads like this I feel like there are too many Sonic fans who aren't indulging in more grown-up forms of media that will scratch this sort of itch. There are lots of stories out there that are well-written and enjoyable in spite of the main character going through such turmoil, but I just don't really see how it could work hand-in-hand with Sonic's sort of gameplay. That sort of story can work in a game where the cut-scenes don't feel like a seperate entity to the gameplay - your The Last of Us's etc. But it's hard to imagine a Sonic game where Sonic is getting emotionally beaten down and then it fades to black and loads up "FUNTIME CASINO ZONE" and you're speeding off with jazzy music and such. Obviously that's an intentionally silly extreme example, but I'm just saying, it'd be hard to pull off, even though I wouldn't mind the idea of seeing it if done well. Also the ideas in the OP seem kind of oxymoronic anyway... Sonic gets knocked down and down to the point of "snapping" yet also "takes it in stride"? What would the snapping portion entail? My first thought would be Sonic somehow giving up and we control another character for a few levels, but that would... frankly be out of character. Sonic got nearly beaten to death before the finale of Sonic and the Black Knight, and he still didn't give up. Likewise in Episode 26 of Sonic X. We've seen Sonic in this kind of scenario already and we know it'd be out of character for him to give up. My ideal "serious" Sonic game would be one where Sonic is put up against insurmountable odds and has to overcome them in a narratively interesting way using a solution that makes sense and can be reasonably pieced together by the audience (not just "a piece of the first boss got lodged into the doomsday weapon and the bad guy didn't notice" or "the bad guy dropped a powerful relic that a character picks up and can magically use to undo another powerful relic and the bad guy didn't notice" etc). Tragedy can definitely happen along the way and be a shocking/surprising or sombre moment to motivate the characters and the player to continue, but just... abusing characters for the sake of it just feels lazy and DARE I SAY IT edgy for edginess' sake.
  13. 5 points
    TBH, there were a bit of that in Sonic Lost World. Where Sonic loose Tails, see Eggman fall to supposedly his death, doesn't get an answer from Amy and Knuckles as life is slowly sucked out of the planet… and all this just because he made a mistake. Lost World's story is basically "Sonic have done a mistake, and it'll get worst now on". It wasn't done pretty right, but I feel that was the intention here : give him a lot of crap to make a stronger return to form (sadly that part wasn't done right too).
  14. 5 points
    Movies aren't made in a vacuum. There are so so so many movies that had an all-star crew that just didn't work out. It happens with games too, and every medium really. Talent on a project can inspire confidence but it doesn't guarantee anything, especially if what people are seeing of the actual film does not appeal to them.
  15. 4 points
    It's been attempted in fucking tons of movies, holy shit you don't know what you're talking about.
  16. 4 points
    Isn't that the plot for the Secret of Nimh which is a cartoon? Same for An American Tale? Plague Dogs. Watership Down.
  17. 4 points
    Y'know thinking about it, word is that Sonic is supposed to come to Earth from his own world or something, right. So they could actually leverage him looking "out of place" because he literally is out of place. Maybe not with a design 100% faithful to the games necessarily, but without requiring him to be a hairy little gremlin for the sake of "realism". Because filmmakers never make mistakes, right? Every movie is, in fact, perfect.
  18. 4 points
    Iron Giant is a classic. I think ET would still have been recieved pretty well if it was an animated movie.
  19. 4 points
    Alright, I guess I'm still a fucking idiot, here we go again. So just for a moment I'm going to entertain the idea that no questions asked, this guy is completely legit in every way and you didn't completely deflect and/or ignore every single other point I've made so far. Besides the fact that that "Sonic" still doesn't actually look good(no creature, cartoon or otherwise, should have pupils that bulge out of their sclera), going "well he drew Sonic once so it must be perfect" isn't actually an argument. He's said "yeah, it looks just like that!" to about a dozen different images, not all of which have a visual consistency, including the exact same one the other guy said looked "just like it" which according to you should discredit him. Do you not see why this circular discussion is complete horseshit yet? You're not gonna get anywhere by taking the words of people we don't know anything about from a screening we haven't seen at an event we didn't attend over the images we've already been given and we already know look bad and we have no reason to expect better from and we have no reason to give any leeway when this film by all rights could have been executed properly if the people involved actually cared about what they were doing. You're constantly telling people that you have the definitive and perfect answer that this amazing movie will have this exact character design because some guy said so, when literally everyone else here knows that's bullshit. That's a "my uncle works at Nintendo" level of response. I feel like I'm in the Nostalgia Critic "well the chart says" gag every single time I reply to one of your posts. We can see what we've been given. It's a grounded, official source and we already know how most of us feel about it. It's a completely understandable prediction to say the face will look as un-Sonic and wrong as the body does, and won't justify that body nor be justified by it whether that ends up being true or not. The damage is already done. We already lost the "will Sonic look like shit"-roulette. Not only is the face unlikely to look good, it won't save a goddamn thing, because the best thing it could look like is exactly the same as the real Sonic's face, which isn't enough to save an awful design.
  20. 4 points
    I honestly don't know why I'm even bothering with you at this point. In fact, I know how things are gonna go down anyway. You heard it here first, folks. Because I predict that "Sonic"'s terrible face is gonna get revealed at some point, it's either gonna look about as bad as the anatomy or as slightly-less-bad as the concept image, everyone's going to hate it, and you're going to come in here, smugly remarking about how shitty and lame anyone else was for ever doubting this amazing design, even if it looks exactly like those two hedgehog-face images you posted, and if I'm still a self-destructive fool we'll go through this same old song and dance again. You're obviously determined to love this thing unconditionally no matter how many poor decisions it seems to make, and even seem to be encouraging more of them. This is an incredibly bizarre frame of mind, I can't relate to it at all. Honestly, I can tell I'm not really getting anywhere here, you're determined to not listen, so I'm gonna check out of this thread until the terrible face is revealed.
  21. 4 points
    So you're just going of what other people have said and not your own eyes?
  22. 4 points
    So, someone drew Amy and Tails in movie style. Actually not looked too bad. I’m ok with this., if this was the design.: Source: https://mobile.twitter.com/ASnowflakeOwl/status/1073728270124834816 Also, SquigglyDigg drew Shadow in movie style.:
  23. 3 points
    Pawn

    Team Sonic Racing OST - "Sand Road"

    It's only a remix of Sand Hill from Sonic Adventure! If nothing else, the game's music is at least peaking my interest in the title. So far the desert tracks are the ones with the most banging themes. It's super great that Tee Lopes is involved again and it's really making me hope the game itself starts to look anywhere close to as impressive as it sounds.
  24. 3 points
    Besides the fact that it has been done before, and the fact that none of us really know exactly what type of movie this is going to be for sure, why does something not having been done before mean it shouldn't ever happen? Why not be a trailblazer? I mean, things can't exist without first having been invented, right? And why shouldn't Sonic be first? Every single live-action film franchise you've mentioned in your posts has been widely regarded as terrible, regardless of monetary success. Going by your logic, that should mean that every future time something like this happens, it'll be terrible. So, in that case, something different should be tried, hmm?
  25. 3 points
    Why are we acting like ripping off ET is anywhere near a good idea for this movie, anyways. The character is an established icon, so audiences are already going to have a hard time buying a new premise for the character like this; Sonic as a "edgy" character doesn't have the same sympathetic angle that any good ET clone has; and at the very least, even the most casual of audiences can call out an ET ripoff storyline a mile away now. It'll be cliche, predictable, and maybe even insulting if the movie asks them to take it too seriously. I said it before but I think this angle would result in an unmitigated disaster, not only from the blockbuster box office results, but from the general audience reception, as well. I can't think of a good reason to hope for this sort of premise from a Sonic movie, either; who asks for a Sonic movie that is all about believable characters and grounded realism, over spectacular feats of speed and athleticism against over-the-top setpieces and villains?
  26. 3 points
    Dude..again, you're talking as if famous studios never, ever made a movie that was a failure..which, I must remind you, is not the case..so quit it with this "well, if Paramount decided on it, it must be true and the right decision" stuff..
  27. 3 points
    At this point, this argument is getting REALLY old. And I'm pretty sure the mods are thinking this as well. Like seriously @PeterPancake, just accept that no one hear, besides @Myst and @Alexios31, share your thoughts and be done with it. Speaking of @Alexios31, he agrees with you for the most part, but you don't see him constantly telling strangers he barely knows that what he's saying about this movie is fact(as in implying, not actually saying it). You can share your disagreement with others and passion of this movie, that's your right, but don't be continuously shoving your opinions down other people's throats to make them agree with you. It makes you look VERY desperate.
  28. 3 points
    Just cause 99.9% of this fanbase hates a design that lacks any good traits and doesn't look like sonic at all and want better of this film doesnt make us toxic. It makes us fans with standards.
  29. 3 points
    3 people out of tons isn't saying much. And this is comng from someone who loved Forces and is in a small minority of people who didn't outright 100% adore Mania, so being in that "3 people" position isn't something I'm a stranger to. One, I was joking. Two, I never said it was anything to be proud of, so please don't put words in my mouth.
  30. 3 points
    Your Vest Friend

    The chosen animals species

    I don't see the point of making them Tenrecs or Minks if they're gonna look identical to a Hedgehog anyway. That's picking other species for the sake of it.
  31. 3 points
    For the sake of of your argument, I’ll say sure; those examples haven’t been affected much by those projects. But —as I’m repeating myself for the third time now— not every franchise gets to shake off infamous projects like that unscathed, even if they do get new products. New projects aren’t the end-all to a franchise’s health and success. To bring up some examples of my own: Bubsy got his first game in 24 years after the 3D game in the 1990s. He has another game coming up. Would you say that is a series that’s absolutely fine? The series is still seen as an absolute joke, unless you actually want to argue that people actually take Bubsy as a series seriously nowadays. What about the DCEU? Sure, most of their films still made money and an Aquaman film is about to be released. But are people looking at it as a genuine rival to Marvel’s superhero films as WB has been pushing it to be? Did the last film (Justice League) underperform at the box office for virtually no reason? Metroid as a series was thought to be a series as good as dead until Samus Returns and Prime 4 were announced last year. Even though the last game was Federation Force from 2016. Why would that be the case? Even before the recent/last game in 2015 in Pro Skater 5; the Tony Hawk series was largely considered dead in the water. It was still being given new games up until that point; but could anyone really say it was still as big as it used to be back in the late 1990s and early 2000s? Except you weren’t just referring to yourself in that comment. It’s really obvious you weren’t commenting strictly about yourself with the way you phrased that original reply. Are you deliberately pretending to not notice key points of my posts? Meanwhile, I’m going to outright disagree that you haven’t said the series getting more missteps was a good thing. Maybe that wasn’t your intent but given your entire argument so far has been hand waving them as inconsequential, it certainly seems that way. Especially since you said the above after blowing off people responding negatively to the film poster as in hysterics.
  32. 3 points
    Depends on the sort of wringer. Let's not make it too much. But the emotional wringer, where he's mostly seeing his efforts failing and others being hurt as a result, it slowly wearing until at one point one thing just gets to him and knocks down the jenga tower? Sure, Because at the end of it, he can pick himself back up, try to get through, succeed and continue moving on. That would be a great show of his character, and even if it if the story has its corny moments, it could still be a relatable, interesting look at him nonetheless. (Basically, like you said) It doesn't have to be something like "Sonic sees a man get eviscerated, watches a car crush someone, and Tails dies a slow, painful death before his very eyes" but crap if it can't something scarring to him. For instance, in Forces, even if he wasn't tortured for a year, being in that small space for that long, not being able to make his own choices, every moment of his being on camera, knowing that others suffered as a result of his loss has to leave some sort of mark. But that REALLY depends on the writing behind it.
  33. 3 points
  34. 3 points
    Looks cute, but when people draw these, they're not really going all the way.. they're not capturing the true essence of it
  35. 3 points
    Seems more like a pattern than "not liking anything Sonic." This film, whether by leak or official reveal, hasn't yet done anything to leave a positive impression on anyone who was already fed up with how badly this series has been managed on a nearly consistent basis. Maybe a trailer could change that, but they're certainly not off to a great start if that's their plan. The problem isn't trying to appeal to fans and that not working, the problem is the execution. From everything I've gathered (because I have better things to do with my time than watch things I already knew were garbage), Out of the Shadows was just low-effort pandering from a studio that obviously didn't care in the first place, and decided to do what every other toy company has done with the Turtles and exploit one group's nostalgia to try to earn some brownie points in a fandom that already didn't like what they had on offer. And then it bombed and Paramount is looking at a retool/reboot. That's not the fault of the fans. That's the studio being incompetent.
  36. 2 points
    Basically, the writers put Sonic through as much abuse as possible. Terrible thing after terrible thing happens to him and his friends, eventually to the point where he snaps. But in the end he takes all of these traumatic events in stride and carries on. Of course this is speaking if this plot was done right like the later issues of Pre-boot Archie Sonic. Done poorly, it would be like a bad Spongebob episode. The kind where a character is punished for no good reason. (Most notably Squidward)
  37. 2 points
    Razule

    IDW's Sonic the Hedgehog

    Apparently it sells well, so hopefully that won't happen. But.. there are unforeseen circumstances that are impossible to predict, so there's no point in worrying about that now. Reception is good, sales are good.
  38. 2 points
    Razule

    IDW's Sonic the Hedgehog

    Pretty sure it was just Ian's personal choice not to name the new locations we saw because it would be clutter/world-building for the sake of it or something. Nothing about it being a mandate. And.. we're still only 11 issues in.. I'd like it'll eventually become less boring without doing that.
  39. 2 points
    But the thing is, Doctor Strange did not have visuals that look like they belong in a Looney Tunes Christmas Special. They looked real and believable. When Strange did battle with the Acolytes of Kaecillius, they did not use Looney Tunes ropes and cartoon manholes to warp around the universe. They used wormholes and beams of energy. Same goes for Infinity War. Thanos, Proxima, Corvus Glaive etc all CG and all of them were rendered realistically. Thanos didn't look like a cartoon, he looked like a real creature. ILM went out of their way to make sure Thanos looked and felt real. Like a real interacting with his environment You guys are all talking about ANIMATED movies... I feel like we are all completely different pages right now. I'm not talking about animated movies.
  40. 2 points
    Correct us if we are wrong, but isn't the whole aspect of Transformers that they are disguised as ordinary vehicles in order to blend in, and thus should look like real machines anyway? Which is what the original designs reflected in the '80s, save for the creature-based ones? Also, watch the Iron Giant and Persepolis in regard to your concerns about animation lacking emotional depth.
  41. 2 points
    Oh and here we go with the "let's wait and see" brigade again. Everyone on Earth knows how this ends.
  42. 2 points
    I'm gonna tell you right now that save your breath: you will never convince me this movie is good on any level. There are bad games/movies where the concept is good, but it failed at the execution, then there are games/movies that fail right at the very concept. For me, this movie failed at the very concept. I never, ever wanted to see Sonic set in the real world, because A: I find that boring as our world as a setting is not fit to bring out the most of his abilities/character, we need the wacky settings of his world to really make him shine IMO, and B: we already had the whole "Sonic set in the human world" concept, it was called Sonic X and it got very boring very fast, as the human world really did not contribute ANYTHING to Sonic as a character or as a franchise, it just brought his/its potential down.
  43. 2 points
    Yeah i think for once you are and i are on the same page here Sonic Fan J I mean really why is this movie live action? Why cant it be completely animated? This really does smell like a lifeless cash grab than anything legitimate and something that will benefit the franchise. I mean i can get behind adapting a franchise for western audiences, I nominally dont have an issue with this. Sure it causes a divide but at the same time appealing to other sensibilities is a necessary evil. But totally changing everything about this franchise for the sake of a live action film really is ludicrous. It was different in the 90's when the series had no established mythology, this is why we got Archie and SatAM like them or hate them they were a side effect of appealing to a non Japanese audience at a time when anime was scarce in America. But this is a whole other level and there is no reason for this movie to exist in the form it does. When animated movies are having a renascence, sure not all are hits but a lot of animated films have had wild success in the last decade. A live action movie does not add up at all, when you had other movies made in the last 5 years that were animated hitting it huge. Frozen, Incredibles 2, Zootopia. The fucking Minions movie Why really why, fuck hollywood.
  44. 2 points
    If we could get some interaction between Bowser Jr and Charmy, that would be golden. We don't even need the parental figures involved, having Bowser Jr, prince of the Koopas and with armies of resources at his disposal, fall foul of a skint bee just because the skint bee plays detective and is arguably more persistent than he is would make a great dynamic.
  45. 2 points
    https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/12/politics/nancy-pelosi-votes-deal-democrats/index.html Pelosi has agreed to serve only one or two more terms. To win the second term, she has agreed she would need the support of two-thirds of the Democratic caucus. This is part of a deal to get her critics to back her; the party rules will be changed for party leaders can only serve 3 terms, with every term afterward requiring a two-thirds vote. When Pelosi last had her serious challenge, she just barely clinched two-thirds. Also note prominent Dem Hoyer's opinion on the matter; he says term limits are awful and has supported repealing term limits on the Presidency. You know, the institution that has the most potential to become autocratic. Cognitive biases are part of life. You cannot help but form them. Having civil rights legislation compels us to try and overcome those biases. Without it, a lot of people will fall back on them. Civil rights laws overcome the huge collective action problem of people supporting equity in the abstract but being wishy washy about it in person. Never mind the fact civil rights laws provide for a healthier economy. They furnish every company with a larger customer and employee base, which makes everyone better off in the long run. There's a reason most businesses have embraced civil rights despite their reputation of being hopelessly conservative. Plus, some people are downright malicious with their prejudices. Civil rights laws protect against those people too. Some coercion is necessary to have a healthy society. Imagine how many projects would never have been built if the state did not force people to cough up taxes to pay for it. In the abstract, everyone shouts "I would pay for that road!" but, surprise surprise, just about every social scientist worth their salt says no, most people would not do this. With regards to personal choice, any public transaction quite likely no longer qualifies as personal. When your store bans black people from shopping there, you are forcing them into other stores that may have goods of lesser quality or be more expensive. You can't claim "muh property rights" when exercising those rights clearly has a negative effect on other people. We settled the separate but equal debate in Brown. In absence of civil rights laws, bad things will crop up again.
  46. 2 points
    JezMM

    Team Sonic Racing OST - "Sand Road"

    The key thing here is that they wouldn't be doing this "zone" thing if it wasn't for the fact that it lightens the workload with making assets. Boo's House and Sand Road are clearly going to share a bunch of assets, but Planet Wisp and Rooftop Run are fairly unique stages in the franchise in terms of theme. Frog Forest and Dinosaur Jungle could definitely re-use grass and rocks and basic trees (not the fancy alien ones) from Planet Wisp but that's about it. Rooftop Run shares very little with any other stage in the franchise (despite at heart being a city genre level without any twists). Regardless, I was only stating the fact that this new music still leaves some unanswered questions, not that I'm sure they'll do one thing or another. It's still a complete mystery whether Whale Lagoon is one of three "beach-themed" tracks, three "Seaside Hill specifically" tracks or three "tracks from previous Sonic racing games" tracks.
  47. 2 points
    I'm sure it all will go very well over with the little kids that will be playing the game.
  48. 2 points
    Would it, though? Who Framed Roger Rabbit has 2D animated cartoon characters mixed with live action and is historic among films. On the other end, Blues Clues entertained children for years. These 2D characters stand out more than cartoony 3D characters when paired with live action. I feel this "take the audience out of the action" claims is an untested belief. Children are going to accept it whatever way presented. Adults aren't going to care one way or the other because it's for their kids. Only Sonic fans who are adult will care and they're distracted by how bad it is. Since that's the party offended while the other two are accepting of any design, you'd hope they would cater to them.
  49. 2 points
    That's kind of ironic, isn't it? And Zaysho has already warned people about these kinds of posts: Look, if you feel optimistic about the film, go ahead and say why. But don't go telling other people how to feel, especially when you yourself have recognised that there are valid concerns to be expressed regarding the film. Attacking the people involved in the film on social media should be called out, I agree, but that's not what's happening here.
  50. 2 points
    To be fair, it’s only really BS if your view of SEGA is comprised solely of Sonic. This image is a tad outdated as it doesn’t factor in a few games released since September. Those being Fist of the North Star and Persona Dancing (Both hovering around a fairly respectable 72). Add in the sublime SEGA AGES ports and development of the Mega Drive Mini being moved in-house as an active response to AtGames, and it seems fairly clear to me that SEGA’s quality control chatter actually has some basis in reality - just not pertaining to modern Sonic, amusingly.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.