Jump to content
Mayor D

Sonic Live Action Movie "Based on the Sonic CD Easter Eggs"

Recommended Posts

GUN is notoriously heavy handed, so making them the antagonists of a movie actually doesn't sound like the worst thing ever. Not sure if they would be able to get the GUN truck raging down the streets (its so impractical lol) but that might means we could be getting hunter mechs and beetle bots in lieu of badniks - which actually translate better to the big screen...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for Sonic being chased down by a government organization like G.U.N, but by the way the descriptions are it seems like we're getting more human focused and the merged worlds like Sonic X. Where is Eggman in this description? Or even Tails, Amy, Knickles or Rouge for that matter? Now I can understand keeping a character like Shadow, Metal, Chaos, Silver, Infinite or Blaze kept quiet, but not the more common characters. Also about the description of Sonic reminds me of the Planes, Trains & Dude-Mobiles episode of Sonic Boom. Now I don't think their referencing Boom because this is a modern Sonic Movie. Now we could see a trailer 9 months before the film releases, which could be in February or March, or I could be wrong and they'll release a trailer with bumblebee in December.

But what will be the deciding factor of this film being good is

1. Sonic's design (as well as the other CGI Sonic characters)

2. Dr. Eggman's design (as long as we don't get another 2006,  instead another redesign more reminicent of the Modern Eggman we all know, depending on whether or not he's live action or CGI or a mixture of both)

3. At least 85-90% of the film should be centered around the Sonic characters

4. Great animation (of course we're talking about Marza and Blur so great animation that surpasses Pixar and Dreamworks, is kind of their thing)

Now another example of transitioning from cell-shaded game models to fully animated for a film would be the Sly Cooper Movie (now a TV show is happening before the film)

Same goes for Angry Birds

Now there is this division that people have involving the Sly and Angry Birds movies and main concern was the designs, however these came from fans of the games. Plus in Angry Birds the characters talked while in the games they didn't. But these are Animated examples, Not CG/Live action.

Jurassic World is even considered CG/Live action, but Sonic would be more considered similar to Spongebob Sponge out of Water. That's what I think the Sonic movie would be like, but it's hard to tell unless Marza releases test animation pictures or video reels. Until a picture of some sort is officially released showing the character designs, I'll be a little skeptic on designs.

One last thing involving Eggman's design, even if there is an actor doing Eggman they could do a CG overlay kind of like what you see in Pirates of the Carribean for all 5 films even using CGI to de-age Jack Sparrow, so this cou;d work for Eggman's character. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will determine if it's a good film is:

1. Good writing/a tight script 

2. Properly developed characters

3. Likable characters (this includes Tom and his partner)

4. Cinematography and sound design

5. The progression from the first, second and third act. 

6. Rich Character relationships and chemistry between the actors 

There are so many other elements that are more important to this movie than Sonic and Eggman looking like the games or how many characters. That's not how the critics are going to judge this movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

There's a reason why designs are always updated or changed for these big budget blockbuster adaptations.

 

There's a reason why Iron Man didn't look like this in the movie:

prcvlv4.jpg

 

Why the Ninja Turtles didn't look like this, not even the old films;

tnKo5w7.jpg

 

Why Captain America didn't look like this IadAdNs.jpg

It's the same reason Sonic is NOT going to look like this with the story they're trying to tell:

 

B5PSoAk.png

 

It is not going to work. You'll see. 

Sounds about right. I guess this heavily implies that Sonic will indeed be extraterrestrial in origin within the universe of the movie.

How about we look at various reasons why these arguments don't work.

For one: Iron Man/Thor/60s Batman/whatever other crappy hero costume you want to use. You want to know why those costumes look bad? Because it's the era that they were originally created in, were inspired by different things, and were made with much different concepts in mind.

For example - Superman's costume with the trunks on the outside wasn't always "goofy". In fact - Superman's original costume - due to Superman's original creation in the 30s was based on that of Strongmen - which were often portrayed like that and it wasn't considered goofy in that era. And by that stage, Superman's costume had become insanely iconic. 

Iron Man and Captain America's costumes in terms of your reasoning is absolutely far more flimsy because you're desperately trying to use the Golden Age versions where comics and costumes were literally designed to be over the top and goofy as comics in that era were designed to be for children and little else to the point harsher tones like Batman originally using guns and killing people was removed so he'd just be a wacky crimefighter. 

Furthermore, you brought up Adam West's Batman outfit as an example of a "comic character not translating well", despite the fact the costume was made in the fucking 60s on a TV show budget - of course it's going to be cheap.

Better yet, there's the casual leaving out of this: 

latest?cb=20160323142400

Which was based on the original costume while updating the colour scheme from blue to black, and literally that's it, and while it's still got improvement to be made - it actually looks incredibly good in the movie itself and flows well with the action and tone and looks even better when it's in dark lighting. Keeping in mind - Tim Burton's Batman movies were also incredibly dark yet they kept his costume - complete with yellow and black bat symbol in-tact and it's still regarded as one of the best films featuring Batman.  

You're also trying to use Iron Man, Spider-Man and others as examples by comparing them to the 60s versions which were drawn absolutely goofy and to the knowledge of the era (Iron Man's design is like that because it was in the 60s where I doubt people had a real idea of how futuristic metal suits were used). But even better - the likes of the Iron Man movie, Captain America movie and more are based on updated comic designs from past the 2000s. 

Captain America for example has adopted tons of changes for his original costume, to the point that by his original death after Civil War in the comics, it was a more armoured and darker version of his original outfit. Iron Man's design was absolutely different - a lot more accurate and closer to his movie design 2 years beforehand. 

latest?cb=20070524065830

So no, your examples of "Captain America and Iron Man" and whatever other outdated hero designs you want to draw as an example of "completely and utterly altering designs from comics to movies" isn't going to work - because you'll find that the movies themselves are either due to the era (Batman '66/Wonder Woman 70s), or their movie designs are based on the actual modern comics themselves that's evolved from the original golden age designs. On top of that - you use Spider-Man as an example despite the fact his ASM2 outfit, and his Homecoming outfit got praised hard for being extremely accurate to the original source material - rather than drawing away and changing it like Rami and especially ASM1 did. 

And since you've decided to bring in the Turtles while we're at it, let's dissect why your example is absolutely wrong as well. Because you're trying to use absolute cheap puppets based on the 2012 version - which I know for a fact were used at theme parks because I happened to see these costumes a few years back in person at a theme park. 

Let's be accurate to the example most people use when they bring up the TMNT:

latest?cb=20061124053900

The turtles similar to Sonic is in a certain animated style, that wouldn't particularly blend well to reality. But with the right effects and puppetry, they created this which is still pretty damn impressive to this day:

latest?cb=20140530122721

These are the designs done for the 1990 film done by Jim Henson - who is the beloved creator of the Muppets and someone who is completely amazing with puppetry, and he managed to successfully translate the turtles into a realistic fashion that retained the characteristics of the original designs but translated into something that actually feels real. These look like a successful blend of the characters to realistic live action without changing them entirely or making them look creepy.

And then we have this: 

latest?cb=20161004051207

These designs got absolutely panned and mocked upon release because they over-relied too hard on CGI and on top of that, tried far far far too hard to make them completely "realistic", leaving uncanny valley creepy monstrosities that looked plain ugly compared to the designs done over 20 years ago by Jim Henson. 

And as much as I absolutely despise the "two worlds" nonsense, if there's ever a time they should be using that to their advantage, it's now. If they wanted their best bet to do a "Sonic" movie, then instead of trying to desperately blend Sonic into an uncanny valley creepy mess that fits "realistically", they should instead set up that what might look strange in our world is perfectly normal in his world. Look at the classic example:

latest?cb=20110825025527

Who Framed Roger Rabbit - by all admission should look absolutely fucking stupid. Cartoon characters with all of their normal properties and physics walking alongside normal guys with absolutely nothing different about them. Yet it works absolutely well because not only do they give us a reason for why this is a common and accepted thing in this world - but Roger himself as a character feels like a real character, that he feels like he exists and fits into the world, despite the fact his entire laws of physics destroy literally everything we as humans know. He goes ballistic when he takes one drink, he manages to leave specific holes in windows when he crashes through them, yet the world itself has given us a atmosphere and reason why this works.   

I don't think trying to transplant Sonic into perfect realism works whatsoever, every design I've seen here of it has just been completely unappealing to me and looked like something directly out of the Uncanny Valley - something striving hard to be real but just not hitting the mark whatsoever. The thing about this movie is this: It's creating a specific world, and universe. It can dictate the rules and what "works, and what doesn't work" and you'd be surprised by the level of suspension of disbelief us as film viewers can have. The same way we can get immersed in something like Ratchet & Clank or even Sonic the game series to begin with is testament to that. They have breathing room here as long as they have an in-universe reasoning and explanation for Sonic's appearance not fitting the human's appearances.

They're in control of the universe and they can explain to us what the rules are as long as it doesn't completely shatter our suspension of disbelief. The same way we know that Roger Rabbit shouldn't be able to exist in our world - but in the movie's world, it's given a perfect explanation that's easily followed and doesn't break any of the pre-established rules set by the movie itself. Once again - it draws in an important question. People are going into a movie called Sonic - based on a fast talking blue hedgehog which is in itself based on Sonic the Hedgehog. You need to have some expectation of suspending your disbelief and willing to follow the rules of the movie's universe or else you wouldn't be going to see it anyway. I'm tired of saying it but I'll say it again - I'm paying to see Sonic the Hedgehog and his world/characters represented in a movie, not to see realistic world with Tom the Cop and Uncanny Valley Sonic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Eggman will be hired by the government or GUN or the FBI. He probably might send his robots to capture Sonic. Maybe Metal Sonic will appear in the movie. I could see an scene where Sonic and Metal Sonic fighting in the town, causing havoc and mayhem similar to like this.:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqlaXylsMwQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

What will determine if it's a good film is:

1. Good writing/a tight script 

2. Properly developed characters

3. Likable characters (this includes Tom and his partner)

4. Cinematography and sound design

5. The progression from the first, second and third act. 

6. Rich Character relationships and chemistry between the actors 

There are so many other elements that are more important to this movie than Sonic and Eggman looking like the games or how many characters. That's not how the critics are going to judge this movie.

I was actually going to name some of those, but forgot to by the time my internet started working again. Mostly the first one, because it needs a really good story and a very epic. Super Sonic finale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 You really went all out with this post and I appreciate you taking the time to do this but I'm going to have to trim it down and address the key point here individually because this is a huge post

 

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Iron Man and Captain America's costumes in terms of your reasoning is absolutely far more flimsy because you're desperately trying to use the Golden Age versions where comics and costumes were literally designed to be over the top and goofy as comics in that era were designed to be for children and little else to the point harsher tones like Batman originally using guns and killing people was removed so he'd just be a wacky crimefighter. 

I'm using these designs as an analogy to cartoon Sonic from the games. I know WHY they looked the way they looked back in day, I know about the Circus strongman thing, Batman being kid friendly and Iron Man's suit being based on retro futurism but that's not the point I was making. What I'm trying to say is - all of these old-school, cartoony designs would never work for the modern audience and if they showed up in those outfits - they would be impossible to take seriously. These change and adapt for a reason and Sonic's Looney Toons-esque design falls into the same category as those Silver Age designs.

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Furthermore, you brought up Adam West's Batman outfit as an example of a "comic character not translating well", despite the fact the costume was made in the fucking 60s on a TV show budget - of course it's going to be cheap.

Better yet, there's the casual leaving out of this: 

latest?cb=20160323142400

Which was based on the original costume while updating the colour scheme from blue to black, and literally that's it, and while it's still got improvement to be made - it actually looks incredibly good in the movie itself and flows well with the action and tone and looks even better when it's in dark lighting. Keeping in mind - Tim Burton's Batman movies were also incredibly dark yet they kept his costume - complete with yellow and black bat symbol in-tact and it's still regarded as one of the best films featuring Batman.  

What does this have to do with my argument against cartoon Sonic? If anything, it strengthens it. Burton knew that the classic blue and grey spandex suit with the trunks would never work w the story he was trying to tell. So he essentially reinvented Batman's entire look. Instead of grey spandex, we got black body armor. Instead of the white eyes we got Keaton behind the cowl with  panda makeup around his eyes. There were no trunks on the suit either. This was a completely new look for Batman that still kept the iconography of the character intact but it was still a radical departure from the comics:

batman.jpg Using the same thought process Burton used when discarding the Neil Adams look - movie Sonic would look like this:

fjScD3F.jpg

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

You're also trying to use Iron Man, Spider-Man and others as examples by comparing them to the 60s versions which were drawn absolutely goofy and to the knowledge of the era (Iron Man's design is like that because it was in the 60s where I doubt people had a real idea of how futuristic metal suits were used). But even better - the likes of the Iron Man movie, Captain America movie and more are based on updated comic designs from past the 2000s. 

Captain America for example has adopted tons of changes for his original costume, to the point that by his original death after Civil War in the comics, it was a more armoured and darker version of his original outfit. Iron Man's design was absolutely different - a lot more accurate and closer to his movie design 2 years beforehand. 

latest?cb=20070524065830

So no, your examples of "Captain America and Iron Man" and whatever other outdated hero designs you want to draw as an example of "completely and utterly altering designs from comics to movies" isn't going to work - because you'll find that the movies themselves are either due to the era (Batman '66/Wonder Woman 70s), or their movie designs are based on the actual modern comics themselves that's evolved from the original golden age designs.

This is a total misconception of my analogy. I know that Iron Man and Cap have evolved since the 60s and I knew their movie suits were based on the Civil War/Ultimate versions of these characters. But point is- they did not use the cartoony, cheesy designs from the 60s. All the heroes got a costume update based partly on the more GROUNDED designs from the modern era. Cartoon Sonic is in the same wheelhouse as old school Iron Man or Cap.

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

On top of that - you use Spider-Man as an example despite the fact his ASM2 outfit, and his Homecoming outfit got praised hard for being extremely accurate to the original source material - rather than drawing away and changing it like Rami and especially ASM1 did. 

... I used Spider-Man as an example of a FAITHFUL costume design that *Updates* the classic suit. Spider-Man's design unlike the others is timeless and much easier to translate. But both Homecoming and TASM2 are not literal page rips of the classic suit. Homecoming has the black bits, techy chest spiders and dual web pattern and the lines on the blue  9ee1c6df124f8aa4c28bfe78c9a4d04d.jpg

Amazing Spider-Man 2 had the daddy long legs spider and grey webbing that was raised:

maxresdefault.jpg

 

What they did was take the classic suit and "movie-ize' the look. They updated the classic suit. That same design process is what I'm suggesting Sonic will go through. What you're suggesting is to literally the CG model used in the games and slap It onto a movie screen.  And that's not what any of the costume designers for the Spider-Man movies did.

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

And since you've decided to bring in the Turtles while we're at it, let's dissect why your example is absolutely wrong as well. Because you're trying to use absolute cheap puppets based on the 2012 version - which I know for a fact were used at theme parks because I happened to see these costumes a few years back in person at a theme park. 

Correct. But they look like like cartoons in real life so that's why I used them.  

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Let's be accurate to the example most people use when they bring up the TMNT:

latest?cb=20061124053900

The turtles similar to Sonic is in a certain animated style, that wouldn't particularly blend well to reality. But with the right effects and puppetry, they created this which is still pretty damn impressive to this day:

latest?cb=20140530122721

These are the designs done for the 1990 film done by Jim Henson - who is the beloved creator of the Muppets and someone who is completely amazing with puppetry, and he managed to successfully translate the turtles into a realistic fashion that retained the characteristics of the original designs but translated into something that actually feels real. These look like a successful blend of the characters to realistic live action without changing them entirely or making them look creepy.

So essentially your analogy is to take a cartoon charatcer and make them look... More realistic? Because that's exactly what Jim Henson did back in 1990. He wanted the Turtles to look as lifelike as possible, he didn't make them look like cartoons. They had dirt, grim and an actual skin texture, real teeth and realistic eyes. They also had more realistic, humanoid proportions from the FW show or the comics at the time. So using the Henson analogy, you'd STILL end up with a more realistic looking Sonic.

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

And then we have this: 

latest?cb=20161004051207

These designs got absolutely panned and mocked upon release because they over-relied too hard on CGI and on top of that, tried far far far too hard to make them completely "realistic", leaving uncanny valley creepy monstrosities that looked plain ugly compared to the designs done over 20 years ago by Jim Henson. 

No argument there. Those designs were terrible but they didn't detract anyone from the movie and it was still a box-office success. It made more money than the 1990 film, even adjusted for inflation.

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

And as much as I absolutely despise the "two worlds" nonsense, if there's ever a time they should be using that to their advantage, it's now. If they wanted their best bet to do a "Sonic" movie, then instead of trying to desperately blend Sonic into an uncanny valley creepy mess that fits "realistically", they should instead set up that what might look strange in our world is perfectly normal in his world. Look at the classic example:

latest?cb=20110825025527

Who Framed Roger Rabbit - by all admission should look absolutely fucking stupid. Cartoon characters with all of their normal properties and physics walking alongside normal guys with absolutely nothing different about them. Yet it works absolutely well because not only do they give us a reason for why this is a common and accepted thing in this world - but Roger himself as a character feels like a real character, that he feels like he exists and fits into the world, despite the fact his entire laws of physics destroy literally everything we as humans know. He goes ballistic when he takes one drink, he manages to leave specific holes in windows when he crashes through them, yet the world itself has given us a atmosphere and reason why this works.   

Yes, and Roger Rabbit inhibits a world where "toons" have always existed alongside mankind. And the movie constantly pokes fun and exacerbates the absurditity of the fact that cartoon characters are going through real problems that normal people go throgh everyday. It is SELF-AWARE. Roger Rabbit is also a comedy aimed primarily at children despite the mature themes. It was still a PG-Rated Kids film. This movie is obviously going to take a more straightforward, action film in vein of F&F and Guardians of the Galaxy so it will probably be rated PG-13 for intense action and possibly some profanity. This movie is not being aimed at 10 year old kids. 

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

I don't think trying to transplant Sonic into perfect realism works whatsoever, every design I've seen here of it has just been completely unappealing to me and looked like something directly out of the Uncanny Valley - something striving hard to be real but just not hitting the mark whatsoever. The thing about this movie is this: It's creating a specific world, and universe. It can dictate the rules and what "works, and what doesn't work" and you'd be surprised by the level of suspension of disbelief us as film viewers can have.

For the type of movie this is going to be (PG-13 action, adventure blockbuster) Sonic getting a realistic design is an absolute necessity. If this was going to be a kids romp about "Sonic coming out of a video game" and into our world - you would have a stronger leg to stand on. But with certan labels and certain types of films come certain expectations. And regardless of if they'e creating their "world" if they try to sell this movie as a serious blockbuster action film with a cartoon as the main character - that suspension of disbelief is going to be shattered for most people. In order for what you want to work, this movie would have to approach things and the concept completely differently.

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

The same way we can get immersed in something like Ratchet & Clank or even Sonic the game series to begin with is testament to that. They have breathing room here as long as they have an in-universe reasoning and explanation for Sonic's appearance not fitting the human's appearances.

Ratchet and Clank the movie was CG animated KIDS film and the games are nothing like the making of a movie. Same for Sonic. Movies are a completely different form of entertainment than games. What works in a video game with a highly stylized universe does not work in a live action movie with real environments and real actors.

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

 You need to have some expectation of suspending your disbelief and willing to follow the rules of the movie's universe or else you wouldn't be going to see it anyway.

That's what marketing is for. To sell people on a movie. If they see the trailer and it looks dumb with cartoons in a serious story, they're not going to want to see it.

14 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

I'm tired of saying it but I'll say it again - I'm paying to see Sonic the Hedgehog and his world/characters represented in a movie, not to see realistic world with Tom the Cop and Uncanny Valley Sonic.

We can't always have what we want, though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody has given much of a case for not just doing Sonic 1 Expanded:

>Sonic 1 Plot

>Eccentric super mega billionaire Eggman hunts down Chaos Emeralds since they're remnants of the Angel Island civilization (here home to both humans and Echidnas like in the Genesis days, back in the past I mean), so he makes robots to search for them all over South Island. He also plans to exploit the island's resources for his own purposes (might or not be rebuilding the world in his vision).

>The robots use critters as an energy source. Eggman abducts and enslaves (complete with raiding villages for slaves, you can even allude to deaths if you want to be edgy) critters.

>Sonic then catches wind of this and travels around saving all the captured critters.

>Eggman sends his subordinates (Orbot and Cubot I guess) to seize the emeralds and stop the pesky blue beast.

>They all fight. Eggman loses but retreats with his few robots to plot anew.

There it is. It's really simple enough. No unwanted characters like Shadow, Amy, Blaze, etc (I kid). Has a sure focus on Sonic, Eggman, and their battle over South Island. Keeps to the "Industrialization VS The Wild" theme of Genesis without being too on the nose about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

Yes, and Roger Rabbit inhibits a world where "toons" have always existed alongside mankind. And the movie constantly pokes fun and exacerbates the absurditity of the fact that cartoon characters are going through real problems that normal people go throgh everyday. It is SELF-AWARE. Roger Rabbit is also a comedy aimed primarily at children despite the mature themes. It was still a PG-Rated Kids film. This movie is obviously going to take a more straightforward, action film in vein of F&F and Guardians of the Galaxy so it will probably be rated PG-13 for intense action and possibly some profanity. This movie is not being aimed at 10 year old kids. 

You imply that cartoons are for 10 year old kids. I personally despise this way of thinking, animation is for anyone.

Watching the trailer and reading the synopsis, Who Framed Roger Rabbit looks like an all-audiences movie, with things that parents would not allow their children to see. And let me remind you that back then, ratings were very lenient. If the rating was re-reviewed for today, it'd definitely get a PG-13 rating, or an M rating where I come from. Or it would hinge on being that rating, being a very hard PG, parental guidance required.

 

2 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

So essentially your analogy is to take a cartoon charatcer and make them look... More realistic? Because that's exactly what Jim Henson did back in 1990. He wanted the Turtles to look as lifelike as possible, he didn't make them look like cartoons. They had dirt, grim and an actual skin texture, real teeth and realistic eyes. They also had more realistic, humanoid proportions from the FW show or the comics at the time. So using the Henson analogy, you'd STILL end up with a more realistic looking Sonic.

2 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

For the type of movie this is going to be (PG-13 action, adventure blockbuster) Sonic getting a realistic design is an absolute necessity. If this was going to be a kids romp about "Sonic coming out of a video game" and into our world - you would have a stronger leg to stand on. But with certan labels and certain types of films come certain expectations. And regardless of if they'e creating their "world" if they try to sell this movie as a serious blockbuster action film with a cartoon as the main character - that suspension of disbelief is going to be shattered for most people. In order for what you want to work, this movie would have to approach things and the concept completely differently.

2 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

If they see the trailer and it looks dumb with cartoons in a serious story, they're not going to want to see it.

Time for me to bring up my favourite musical artist, of which is a cartoon band.

They're nothing like Alvin and the Chipmunks, not even close to what the Archies are.

May I please present to the stage, Gorillaz.

gorillaz-sonar-bcn-2018.jpg

On the surface, Gorillaz seems like a cartoon band with an odd art style. But there is far more to Gorillaz than that, and it doesn't take long to realise this. First of all, Gorillaz doesn't take place in it's own cartoon world, they are a band with connections to this world, they are a part of our reality. They even acknowledge their creators in our world, calling Damon Albarn a tosspot who taught the lead singer how to sing properly, and steals nearly all their concerts with his "Gorillaz Tribute Band" that the bassist despises, and Jamie Hewlett is their stylist who does all the designs, photo shoots, and clothing. They do interviews with real people, even doing concerts themselves when holograms can be afforded.

Gorillaz is also NOT FOR KIDS. From the band member's backstories down to the themes of the songs. Heck, one of the members was believed to have died for a little while, and they were 15 years old when that happened.

When they don't have their own music videos, they also have music videos in our world too as 2D cartoon animations. No one questions this, and it doesn't seem out of place. They even interact with each other despite being on separate dimensional planes.

Spoiler

 

Audiences ate it up, applauding the videos while also not questioning why there are cartoon characters in the "real world". This is all because it's never pointed out or seen as unusual. They're treated in the videos like they're real people. All cool and such, and they also have videos of them as 3D CG characters. And you'll find they don't differ much from the 2D/live-action videos at all...

Spoiler

 

Sure, they look more realistic, but they do not abandon the original 2D design. All it looks like is that the characters have been brought into a three dimensional plane. One or two small adjustments, and boom, there's nothing to question besides "oh that's how they look in our world". Everyone treats them as normal, no one points out the oddity of it all, and audiences can see it's still the same characters they love.

That's because their look is ESTABLISHED in their franchise, no dimensional plane will change that. Their design is made damn clear, and they preserve every effort to make sure that design stays in everything. Since that's the way they've always looked, audiences are fine with that and let it be.

Those CGI redesigns of TMNT? Too different from what audiences expect from characters we all know, they can't accept it. The movie being a box office success means fuck all when the designs of the turtles are a common complaint of the movie that no one likes and forces themselves to put up with so they can watch their favourite characters back in action. So those puppet redesigns of the turtles are actually good, because they bring the turtles to a 3D plane yet still keep the same design they've always had.

So when you say audiences won't take a cartoon hedgehog seriously and will only accept a realistic rendition of him, I find that hard to believe when anything can be taken seriously, so long as you don't break what the audiences are used to.
Marvel movies can be taken seriously, not because they're in our world, but because they don't change what we've come to expect from their characters.
Gorillaz does this too with their characters, treating their different designs for their characters as something normal.
And as much as I hate movies like The Smurfs, Alvin and the Chipmunks, and Yogi Bear, EVEN THOSE MOVIES are aware of this, and actually don't change the designs that much besides making them far too realistic for their own good.

 

If you tell an audience that something looks the way it is in a thing's world, the audience's cognition has been set and their suspension of disbelief cannot be broken. Unless, UNLESS you break the design rules of that world to introduce something else completely different to what's been established, then audiences will tell you to get stuffed. Like the realistic appearance of Dr Eggman from Sonic '06. He has a long established look in the franchise which has been broken to become something realistic, so audiences cannot accept the change.

And speaking of long established looks...

latest?cb=20180612182103

TWENTY. SEVEN. YEARS. Of a single established design for Sonic the Hedgehog himself. Minor changes here and there, but the character image of Sonic is classic, his silhouette is classic, and he is a gaming icon akin to Mario. You imply that 90% of the audience won't know who Sonic is, and I find that laughably wrong if he's a pop culture icon. Even as I've had classes with 60 year old teachers who aren't aware of anything these days, they know Sonic too, even if they have never played any of his games. For that matter, why go see a movie adaptation about a speedy blue hedgehog if you have no damn clue who he is?

Break that suspension of disbelief with a design that's been ingrained to the point of pop culture osmosis with a realistic design that looks nothing like who we all know, and THAT will then get laughed out of theatres.

 

TL;DR:

If the design in a franchise looks a certain way, it stays the same way no matter what world you're in. Sonic will look like Sonic, because that's the way he's always looked. Break that established design that audiences are used to, and audiences cannot accept it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep seeing references in this discussion to the fact that the Sonic movie's going to be a PG-13.... but is it really? Has this actually been confirmed? Because 'action adventure' doesn't automatically mean that it has to be PG-13 nor serious, you can quite happily have light-hearted PG rated action adventures.

The idea of a 'serious' realistic Sonic with possible profanity fills me with dread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nestor said:

I keep seeing references in this discussion to the fact that the Sonic movie's going to be a PG-13.... but is it really? Has this actually been confirmed? Because 'action adventure' doesn't automatically mean that it has to be PG-13 nor serious, you can quite happily have light-hearted PG rated action adventures.

The idea of a 'serious' realistic Sonic with possible profanity fills me with dread.

The movie is far from the stage of actually being rated for audiences. So it's currently unrated until further notice.

There is an aim to hit PG-13 for whatever reason, though... It'd be like a T-rated Sonic game, which we haven't had since Shadow the Hedgehog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I'm burnt out on creating these long, essay-esque arguments. I guess we'll just have to to see who's right in the end. If the movie will hilariously look like this

latest?cb=20130301202131

 

Or a Sonic who actually belongs in a realistic environment. This argument is going to go nowhere. I find a cartoon Sonic becoming less and less likely with every bit of info coming out about this movie. We may found out at Comic Con

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Polkadi said:

There is an aim to hit PG-13 for whatever reason, though... It'd be like a T-rated Sonic game, which we haven't had since Shadow the Hedgehog.

Good grief.

Between that, the complete lack of reference to Eggman or any of the other cast, and the fact that out of all of the incredible vistas and set-pieces that the franchise has to offer, they chose Nowheresville, US as the movie location, my optimism for this movie is not super high.

I wait to be pleasantly surprised, but I'm not holding my breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Nestor said:

Good grief.

Between that, the complete lack of reference to Eggman or any of the other cast, and the fact that out of all of the incredible vistas and set-pieces that the franchise has to offer, they chose Nowheresville, US as the movie location, my optimism for this movie is not super high.

I wait to be pleasantly surprised, but I'm not holding my breath.

Eggman is in the movie. Van (the writer of the first draft) confirmed he was in It. 

It's also worth mentioning that he said that he expects Sonic to get some sort of redesign for the movie when a fan asked him on Twitter. Because even he's aware of how absurd this would look trying to pass off in any semblance of a serious story

maxresdefault.jpg

 

And this heavily insinuates that the filmmakers are very aware of this problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

Eggman is in the movie. Van (the writer of the first draft) confirmed he was in it.

Well that's something at least, all though I do worry how they're going to portray him...

51 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

It's also worth mentioning that he said that he expects Sonic to get some sort of redesign for the movie when a fan asked him on Twitter. Because even he's aware of how absurd this would look trying to pass off in any semblance of a serious story

maxresdefault.jpg

 

And this heavily insinuates that the filmmakers are very aware of this problem.

At minimum, even if they were to stay close to his game look, I expect him to be more realistically textured and have some mild accesory variations (like his Sonic Boom incarnation).

However, if your guess is right and they go the whole hog in the redesign.... well, anything's possible frankly.

This is the same franchise that brought us the Werehog, thought a fishing simulator was a sensible addition to a fast paced action game, and had a romantic scene involving a heroine kissing a dead hedgehog. At this point, if they'd said that the Sonic film was going to be a musical set against the backdrop of Bolshevik Russia, I wouldn't have been surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's too early to predict what's gonna happen, Tails, Knuckles and Amy, should be a safe bet but you never know. It's more likely that some of them have been already captured by the government and Sonic has to rescue them... er, like in Sonic X episode 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Jack the Maniac said:

I think it's too early to predict what's gonna happen, Tails, Knuckles and Amy, should be a safe bet but you never know. It's more likely that some of them have been already captured by the government and Sonic has to rescue them... er, like in Sonic X episode 2.

This sounds about right. Maybe something happens on Sonic's planet (who wants to bet it'll be called "Mobius") and Sonic and his friends get teleported to earth somehow. Sonic escapes but Amy, Tails and Knuckles are caged and locked up in high-secure GUN facility. Maybe in Area 51? Sonic needs a friend because he's sad about what has happened to his friends, he's in  a strange world. 

 

The most interesting part of this whole thing is Eggman. How does he fit into this whole thing? Will he be a Mobian as well or will he be an Earth scientist and robotics manufacturer? Lot of different routes they can take with Eggman.

 

I think it would be cool if we saw his name tag and it read "Dr. Ivo Robotnik" or something. Little Easter eggs for the fans.

I hope they also take inspiration from the comics. It would be cool if they fleshed Sonic out as a character and he had family on his planet (i.e Uncle Chuck). The comics are rich with material to mine from to flesh out not only Sonic but the planet Mobius itself. Maybe we'll see a bunch of familiar faces during the opening scene on Sonic's planet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all the ones who gave up already on the movie: I think it's in more than good hands, remember that the director of Deadpool is here, and the producers of Fast and Furious, so I trust this team, plus Marza for the animation, obviously.

Inb4 they use the counterargument that video game movies suck. I just want something that has action and is funny though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

It's also worth mentioning that he said that he expects Sonic to get some sort of redesign for the movie when a fan asked him on Twitter. Because even he's aware of how absurd this would look trying to pass off in any semblance of a serious story

Didn't Van say that their designs won't be too extreme, and that everybody want it to look and feel like Sonic, according to this tweet 2 years ago?

https://twitter.com/VanTheBrand/status/810254621901930496

However, recently back in February, he isn't sure how Sonic will look like in the movie.

https://twitter.com/VanTheBrand/status/967262599900352512

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CaptainRobo said:

Didn't Van say that their designs won't be too extreme, and that everybody want it to look and feel like Sonic, according to this tweet 2 years ago?

https://twitter.com/VanTheBrand/status/810254621901930496

However, recently back in February, he isn't sure how Sonic will look like in the movie.

https://twitter.com/VanTheBrand/status/967262599900352512

 

Well, he's not part of production design but he's definitely seen some concept art, possibly early animation tests and story board art. (Which is kinda mandatory when writing your script) He has an idea of what he will look like but not a complete picture hence the "Somewhere between can't say and not sure" 

The point I was making is that he confirmed that there will be some sort of redesign to fit Sonic into our world which means - The Unleashed model is not going to be lazily slapped onto the big screen like everyone here is suggesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still not a fan of the movie, but not fond of the many suggestions that a movie about Sonic should just be an adaptation of a game. I'd want to watch something new, not Literally Just One of the Sonic Adventures But Not Playable. I'd say it shows little imagination, but.. I can't really think of what a good Sonic movie should be about aside from the basic premise of "Sonic and friends fight Eggman to save the world"🤷‍♂️

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good lord the more I read about this, the more I realize how much these studio heads have COMPLETELY missed the mark on this.  Here you have a property involving fantasy elements, engaging visuals, interesting characters with a multitude of storyarcs to adapt (mostly the GAMES), yet here they are, squandering the creativity on something bland and unoriginal.  There's a reason why Sonic Mania became a massive hit.  It replicates the style, aesthetic and IMAGINATION of what made the series popular.  Im just tired of these cliche narratives where the mysterious-animal-creature from another world is transported to the human world and has to adapt with "hilarious" consequences.  It seems everytime a cartoon character is being placed in a live action environment, that's their go-to template.  As horrible as the Smurfs were, I gotta give them credit on the 3rd film cause they realized that keeping the characters in their whimsical homeworld is what people wanted.  To me, Ive always viewed Sonic as a apart of that sci-fi fantasy genre, and a feature film with such awesome imagery like Green Hill Zone or dare I say Knothole Village, should be proudly showcased.  It's being faithful to the source material.  Regardless if its for a general audience, it introduces them to the iconic landscapes/characters while appeasing the fans.  

Also, CGI has drastically improved in the last 20 years where this can easily be pulled off.   It just takes a crew who's passionate and has some knowledge of the Sonic mythology.  So far, I see a lack of both.  It only further proves that talented Sonic fans are the only ones who should be involved with the property.  Again, look at Sonic Mania's crew.  It will truly take a dream team of that nature to successfully develop a Sonic movie that captures its tone and style.

So, If the format is live action, then I don't see why they couldn't just film live action backgrounds, alter some of the terrain with recognizable structures from the games.comics, or whatever in post and construct a believable world that Sonic and his friends blend in with.   

I just feel these Hollywood adaptations of famous/endearing characters ALWAYS take the lazy and cookie-cutter approach for a quick buck, and its sadly the impression I'm getting every time an update of this...THING...is posted.  Plus I just find it odd that we recently had announcements for two generic human characters yet the only human that should really matter is Robotnik/Eggman. 

Overall, this production is raising a ton of red flags and I have little confidence that it will be even entertainingly bad.  Just boring and forgettable.  An average romp that played it safe with no risks.          

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we don't know, if this going to end up really badly or not. What we know so far is that Marza and Blur are creating the animations for the movie. Neal H. Moritz  (Fast and Furious, S.W.A.T., 21 Jump Street, I Am Legend, Vantage Point, XXX, Battle: Los Angeles, and The Green Hornet) and Marza producers Takashi Ito (Sonic: Night of the Werehog) and Mie Onishi will produce the movie. Tim Miller and Toby Ascher will be executive producers of the film, while Tim's partner, Jeff Fowler will direct the movie, which this will be the first time that he will direct an feature film. He only direct a short film called Gopher Broke. Dan Jevons and Dmitri M. Johnson will be co-producers of the movie. The script used to be written by Van and his partner Evan (Fist Fight), now written by Josh Miller and Patrick Casey (Golan the Insatiable). However, they only write the first draft, but this guy named Orel Uziel (22 Jump Street and The Cloverfield Paradox) write the recent draft. Next,  we know that the film is going to be releasing next November. we also got an logo that was revealed at Cinema Con. The logo may been an placeholder logo. it's common for films like Black Panther and Captain Marvel to get their logos changed. So that might changed in the future. we know that James Marsden (Westworld, Anchorman 2, Hop, Superman Returns, 2 Guns, and X-Men) and Tika Sumpter (Ride Along and Salt) have been casted in undisclosed roles. We know that they will both play an important part in the movie, but we don't know who they will be playing as. I think James will play the cop guy. We also know that filming will start in Vancouver next month. Filming is also planning to filmed in Highway 19 and an town called Ladysmith which will start filming at both of these places in September. However, we know that it's will be about some cop who will be helping Sonic to fight against Eggman. So, that's all we know. You know, even though this movie probably won't likely be perfect, I'm hoping that it will be an decent enjoyable action packed movie to watch. Also, I'm hoping some of Sonic's friends like Tails, Amy, and Knuckles might end up appearing in this, maybe Rouge could appear in this. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

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.