Jump to content

DreamSaturn

TSS Member
  • Content Count

    521
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by DreamSaturn


  1. Just now, Ming Ming Hatsune said:

    DP certainly had better reception, but that doesn't translate to the film being good.

    TR had a better reception than Sonic.

    Generally speaking, bad movies don't get good scores. There's a reason the highest rated films of all time on something like say, IMDb are movies that re usually considered good. Bad movies also don't get the kind of good press that Detective Pikachu has been getting.


  2. Yep, looked about as awful as I was expecting, but for different reasons.

    Maybe it's just the fact that I was watching it on my phone, but the way Sonic moved was nowhere near high energy enough to convey a satisfying sense of speed, Carrey doesn't seem nearly as energetic enough to be entertaining and the way he carries himself seems downright annoying, even by children's TV standards, and Schwartz doesn't sound nearly as good as I had hoped.


  3. 1 minute ago, Plasme said:

    There's a difference between the camp of Ace Ventura and children shows like the Power Rangers which are aimed at 8 year olds.

    This is such a blindingly obvious point that I'm not going to repeat it.

    It should also be blindingly obvious that there's more gray area of camp and silliness than just those two extremes.

    It should also be blindingly obvious that you completely dodged my point that if a movie isn't trying to be campy and silly, then maybe don't cast someone who's fucking known for being campy and silly as one of the biggest roles in your movie.


  4. 2 hours ago, Plasme said:

    I think Detective Pikachu looks grotesque.

    Well, you're definitely in the minority in that regard. The point is, Detective Pikachu, which retains the original designs and proportions and just adds more realistic textures, is getting far more positive press than anything Sonic related could ever hope to attain, least of all this movie with Bad Cosplayer Robotnik and Naked Furry Gremlin Man Sonic.


  5. 4 hours ago, Plasme said:

    I know people here seem to hate hearing about sensible corporate decisions regarding not being literal to the source material (and Eggman's design is one such sensible move), but no, no you can't just put Eggman from the game and into the film unchanged. Look at virtually all adaptions of comics, cartoons, anime et cetera that have actually worked (mostly in the superhero category). If you put Wolverine in his comic appearance it would just look cringey to the vast majority of people, because only the absolute hardcore lunatics would push for such a sylised design to be used in a product which resembles real life.

    It's the same here. Eggman was designed to be in a cartoon environment, it's why he looks godawful in games like 06 which tried to make him look more realistic. If you adapted him in the most literal way imaginable then it would be a disaster. And it's not simply the case of 'the general public would hate it' (but they would), but a lot of fans like myself would be utterly turned off too.

    Think of making a cartoon or game into a film as a form of translation. It's hard to translate languages literally and some combinations really don't work. In some instances, you need adaption and localisation. Well, if you are going to make Sonic a live action movie (admittedly very dumb decision), you have to adapt him because otherwise it just doesn't translate literally.

    A fun factoid is that there's tiers of accuracy beyond "1:1 perfect recreation of the source material" and "Barely even recognizable as what it's supposed to be",


  6. Just now, PeterPancake said:

    Eggman Is not a marketable look to casual moviegoers, Carrey is one of the most recognizable actors in the industry. I'm sure they could have given him a bald cap and fat suit but there's a story reason why he doesn't have it in the beginning 

    I'm going to call it a bad decision because there's absolutely no reasonable explanation for why he couldn't look closer to begin with. Are fat/bald people just too unrealistic now? Like gloves or socks?


  7. Just now, PeterPancake said:

    Not entirely true. People see Iron Man because Downey is playing him. He is what made that character popular. Take Downey out of the equation and lose the major attracting factor. 

     

    Jim Carrey's face is more recognizable to the general audience than Dr. Robotnik. Carrey is what's going to be putting butts in seats, not Eggman

    Eggman is already a pretty popular character from a pretty popular franchise. If you're going to tell me simply no one would recognize Carrey if you slapped a fatsuit/bald cap on him, then I think you vastly underestimate people.


  8. 2 minutes ago, Myst said:

    I'd like to add Paramount likely wanted Carrey to look like his regular self in order to sell this movie. The same reason that in posters for superhero films, the hero always has their mask off, showing off the famous celebrity's face. If you look at posters for Avengers films, you never see Captain America or Iron Man fully in costume. It's always Robert Downey Jr's face front and center, looking at the camera.

    268x0w.jpg.d62e8020453626175389efca6bcaac0b.jpg

    Just saying, having accurate costumes from the start isn't a bad thing and doesn't immediately damn sales.


  9. Finally worked up the nerve to make a post about it, so, here we are. :P

    Those of you who follow me closely are aware that I do video reviews, my biggest one currently being my Sonic Forces video review. I'm still largely experimenting with them, but with my most recent review, (Portal) I think I found a style that I really like.

    You can find my Sonic Forces review here:

     

    (For reference, CEAON is an older online alias of mine)

    My Sonic Mania Plus review:

    And the one I'm most proud of currently, Portal:

    Next up on the agenda is Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic


  10. 44 minutes ago, pppp said:

    So is the opposite true as well? Is liking the same as loving?

    You know, if the "haters" didn't offer well constructed arguments to why they don't like the movie's direction I could understand yours and Myst's frustration, but that's not the case. You guys on the other hand have nothing to argue back aside from "I've been waiting for this for years, don't ruin this for me" or "It's Sonic, we need to support our franchise".

    Unless you actually have a counter argument, maybe leave the thread for a while if people's opinions bother you so much.

    Agreed. I think boiling this down to a "Haters vs. Nonhaters" type of thing is silly, because we're all working off the exact same information, and I can't blame anyone for being skeptical about a Sonic...well, anything, really, with how much of a roller-coaster of quality this franchise is. Especially when the writers only have stoner and boner comedies to their names, that doesn't really inspire confidence either.

    Sure, some people out there probably do blindly hate it. But of all the negativity surrounding the Sonic movie I've seen? Most of it is entirely justified.

×
×
  • 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.