Sonic Live Action Movie Thread (Read OP for topic rules) "Trailer 2 on Page 482)

[Heckboy]

Just now, Blueknight V2.0 said:

So according to Tails Channels' screenshot of the leak, the trailer should be here at around 3PM tomorrow European Time. Now if I'm reading this correctly that's roughly 8-10AM EST. The time could just about be here, let's hope this looks better than what we expected. Well we already know what Eggman looks like, which I'm okay with. Just odd seeing him with no glasses and smaller moustache. But I can understand the appearance as not yet game Eggman if this is going for an origin story.

 

Oh cool I can be disappointed before I leave for work.

[Legendary Emerald]

1 minute ago, Plasme said:

I think Detective Pikachu looks grotesque.

But how are audiences going to take Pikachu seriously if he looks like a Saturday morning cartoon character? Those poor people at *multi-million dollar production studio* have NO CHOICE but to make a version of him that fits in with reality as best as possible. You can’t expect Pikachu’s iconic design that has stayed consistent since 1997 to work in the high-art world of American cinema.

... I actually think Detective Pikachu’s design IS a good way to go about making something work for live action, but I hope I’ve made my point.

[Tracker_TD]

2 minutes ago, CaptainRobo said:

Would people prefer if Sonic actually look similar like this?:

That's basically just a slightly more grotesque rendering of the movie design, but with gloves and shoes. Which are the most alright looking part of it. 

[Graystripe2000]

I looked at Twitter trends, and the leak currently has 2.5K tweets.

https://www.imgur.com/gallery/s6eTGb2

 

[Heckboy]

5 minutes ago, CaptainRobo said:

Would people prefer if Sonic actually look similar like this?:

I'd just prefer Sonic to look similar to this

[SaturnWolf]

1 minute ago, Heckboy said:

I'd just prefer Sonic to look similar to this

I'm partial to my nasally boy.

[AdventChild]

Yeah, I'm really not feeling it here with Jim as Eggman. A bit underwhelming I might add. Feels like a generic scientist with Eggman colors.

Is it bad that I think Robbie Rotten with a mustache makes a better Eggman?

Spoiler

 

[Zaysho]

I'm very interested in Detective Pikachu because they found a way to do what people keep claiming is impossible and translate these simple, cartoony designs into a "realistic" space, but it also doesn't shy away from the fact that it's a fantasy movie. It's instantly recognizable and I think it's resonating with people because of that. Are some of the designs a little grotesque looking or overdone? Sure, and it's a caveat that comes with those sorts of design decisions, but I don't feel it's a detriment to the film at all.

I can't say the same about Sonic, though. From what we've seen in leaks, and seen of the trailer transcripts, it just sounds really generic and dull. It takes a recognizable design and makes a general approximation and then buffs up the legs because people need to believe this character can run. If you took out the Sonic elements and replaced them with another IP--a similar premise of a strange creature from another dimension come to our world and is trying to find a way back home--you'd lose absolutely nothing. Can you imagine if they did this with Lord of the Rings? Some guy is reading in the library a day and a portal opens up, and the entire movie is him commenting on how absurd or weird it is just so audiences could relate to it? I refuse to believe this is the only way it could have been done if a full animated feature was off limits.

I'm actually fine with Carrey's appearance. Again, it falls into being a little generic, though Carrey himself is the film's draw and probably only saving grace, I can grant some concessions here. I think they could have done a bit more with the suit and added the shades. People aren't asking for much, but this is way less off-putting than what was done with Sonic.

[CaptainRobo]

31 minutes ago, Heckboy said:

I'd just prefer Sonic to look similar to this

Agreed.

 

I don't hate how Eggman look like in the movie. He looks fine to me. I just can't wait for the trailer to come out possibly likely tomorrow morning. This is going to be exciting.

[PeterPancake]

I'm just glad he isn't always decked out in black. I would have made him bald but I'm fine with the design 

[Jango]

20 minutes ago, Zaysho said:

I'm very interested in Detective Pikachu because they found a way to do what people keep claiming is impossible and translate these simple, cartoony designs into a "realistic" space, but it also doesn't shy away from the fact that it's a fantasy movie. It's instantly recognizable and I think it's resonating with people because of that. Are some of the designs a little grotesque looking or overdone? Sure, and it's a caveat that comes with those sorts of design decisions, but I don't feel it's a detriment to the film at all.

I can't say the same about Sonic, though. From what we've seen in leaks, and seen of the trailer transcripts, it just sounds really generic and dull. It takes a recognizable design and makes a general approximation and then buffs up the legs because people need to believe this character can run. If you took out the Sonic elements and replaced them with another IP--a similar premise of a strange creature from another dimension come to our world and is trying to find a way back home--you'd lose absolutely nothing. Can you imagine if they did this with Lord of the Rings? Some guy is reading in the library a day and a portal opens up, and the entire movie is him commenting on how absurd or weird it is just so audiences could relate to it? I refuse to believe this is the only way it could have been done if a full animated feature was off limits.

I'm actually fine with Carrey's appearance. Again, it falls into being a little generic, though Carrey himself is the film's draw and probably only saving grace, I can grant some concessions here. I think they could have done a bit more with the suit and added the shades. People aren't asking for much, but this is way less off-putting than what was done with Sonic.

You should ask Pancake dude about, there's obviously a logical explanation for all that. I mean, how could the audience take seriously a character running at the speed of sound without having muscular legs? It's noooooot like this movie isn't about a fictional character from another planet or anything. Surely there's also a fine explanation as to why such rules should apply even in different planets.

Anyways, when we should expect the trailer, tomorrow-zees?

[Zaysho]

9 minutes ago, Jango said:

You should ask Pancake dude about, there's obviously a logical explanation for all that. I mean, how could the audience take seriously a character running at the speed of sound without having muscular legs? It's noooooot like this movie isn't about a fictional character from another planet or anything. Surely there's also a fine explanation as to why such rules should apply even in different planets.

Don't use my post as an excuse to antagonize another user, thanks.

Actually don't do that at all. It's not any better than what we had to ask people defending the movie to stop doing.

[Scritch the Cat]

1 hour ago, Plasme said:

Sure, but it's not just the yellow stripes, his whole character doesn't really work. Having a big bumbling comical looking man with a big grin and moustache who looks like an egg is so surreal and cartoony that it's just never going to work in live action. They have to make major revisions so he doesn't look stupid or just bland (the other problem you could run into in toning him down).

I think they've done a good job here in re-inventing him for live action. But yeah, the main problem is that this film should never ever have been live action.

If they have any reservations about whether a zany guy can be their villain, then why did they cast Jim Carrey?  Acting like an unhinged cartoon character is what he's known for, so I see nothing wrong with giving him a more whimsical appearance.

Frankly, this notion that live-action films must look a certain way is bullshit.  Such thinking leads to these films looking too much alike and sets the craft back.  Employing more color and flare in live-action movies actually gives them a chance to be noteworthy in a way cartoons and still images aren't, since for those media such are more common.

Think of some live-action things that have become iconic.  German expressionism.  Citizen Kane.  Tim Burton films.  The Super Sentai/Power Rangers series.  300.  All of those did things that didn't visually match reality as much as being live-action would inherently seem to dictate, and all of them are at least memorable.  Granting that not all live-action films should do that, why wouldn't this be one that should?

[SatAMhog]

Jim Carrey with a mustache is Robotnik--yeah, I can sense the negative reviews.^^  I WANT to give the movie a chance but Carrey is making it hard for me to do so.  I don't hate Jim but he really isn't the best Robotnik to me...

[Plasme]

6 minutes ago, Scritch the Cat said:

If they have any reservations about whether a zany guy can be their villain, then why did they cast Jim Carrey?  Acting like an unhinged cartoon character is what he's known for, so I see nothing wrong with giving him a more whimsical appearance.

Frankly, this notion that live-action films must look a certain way is bullshit.  Such thinking leads to these films looking too much alike and sets the craft back.  Employing more color and flare in live-action movies actually gives them a chance to be noteworthy in a way cartoons and still images aren't, since for those media such are more common.

Think of some live-action things that have become iconic.  German expressionism.  Citizen Kane.  Tim Burton films.  The Super Sentai/Power Rangers series.  300.  All of those did things that didn't visually match reality as much as being live-action would inherently seem to dictate, and all of them are at least memorable.  Granting that not all live-action films should do that, why wouldn't this be one that should?

None of those films have big round men with large moustaches who comically grin and look like an egg. And even then, I think the designs in 300 have aged terribly and most people are at least aware of that. Power Rangers has aged better, but only because it's so camp and squarely aimed at children.

Really, the responses on this thread are showing how uncompromising the fanbase is about recognising that a SEGA Genesis cartoon character probably needs to be adapted for a live action film.

If you made Humpty Dumpty into a live action film you would similarly need to redesign him to not look fucking awful in a live action film.

The answer's simple of course, this film never should have been live action. And if we are being really honest, they never should have tried to make a Hollywood film out of Sonic in the first place.

[Blacklightning]

1 minute ago, Plasme said:

Power Rangers has aged better, but only because it's so camp and squarely aimed at children.

What, and Sonic isn't?

[thumbs13]

1 minute ago, Plasme said:

 

Really, the responses on this thread are showing how uncompromising the fanbase is about recognising that a SEGA Genesis cartoon character probably needs to be adapted for a live action film.

Everybody acknowledges that, it's just that nobody else seems to think that it being live action gives them the right to do the literal bare minimum.

[Plasme]

Just now, Blacklightning said:

What, and Sonic isn't?

The film isn't trying to be camp and silly. The Sonic series is both and that's what makes it fun, but the film is clearly trying to go for a Hollywood catch all approach.

If they made an animated film like the Sonic OVA or the Mania Adventure shorts they can go all out with the zaniness and surrealism, because it suits the medium. I mean hell, if they made a children's programme ala Power Rangers and were unrelentingly camp and cheesy I wouldn't care, because that stuff can be legitimately fun for 8 year olds.

1 minute ago, thumbs13 said:

Everybody acknowledges that, it's just that nobody else seems to think that it being live action gives them the right to do the literal bare minimum.

It's not doing bare minimum. Taking stuff from a cartoon game and adapting it to live action takes way more work than anyone on this forum can comprehend.

No one here works at a film studio.

[Scritch the Cat]

It's a little too early to say whether this film is trying to be camp and silly, but much of what I've heard makes me think so.  The one serious thing I've heard about it is the bit about an early mother figure dying, but lots of otherwise zany and fun films have that.

I also don't see how the actual character's traits are all that prohibitive, in principle if not degree. Ok; he can't be totally egg-shaped in live-action, but he can be fatter than he looks here.  He can't have as big a mustache in live-action but he can have a bigger one than he has here.  And of course, he can be bald in live-action.  Actual bald people exist.

Robotnik can be bound by the laws of physics and biology, but he shouldn't make any concessions to fashion trends or beauty standards.  Having a very unique appearance helps sell that he's a loose cannon.

[SaturnWolf]

3 minutes ago, Plasme said:

The film isn't trying to be camp and silly.

Camp and silly is what Jim Carrey is known for. If this film doesn't want to do that, then that's another bad and questionable decision in a long line of bad and questionable decisions that is this movie.

[Plasme]

2 minutes ago, Scritch the Cat said:

It's a little too early to say whethrr this film is trying to be camp and silly, but much of what I've heard makes me think so.

Perhaps, but it's a Paramount blockbuster (even if a minor one), it obviously can't afford to take risks and be silly to the same extent as Power Rangers and other childrens' shows, for example.

And also, it's aimed at both adults and kids (presumably), so it can't get away with the same kind of childish camp as Power Rangers does.

Just now, DreamSaturn said:

Camp and silly is what Jim Carrey is known for. If this film doesn't want to do that, then that's another bad and questionable decision in a long line of bad and questionable decisions that is this movie.

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.

[Tracker_TD]

6 minutes ago, Plasme said:

It's not doing bare minimum. Taking stuff from a cartoon game and adapting it to live action takes way more work than anyone on this forum can comprehend.

No one here works at a film studio.

I can't believe it's 2019 and I still need to use the "you don't have to be a chef to know that's shit on your plate" analogy. Or by that logic, should we not criticise Sonic games because, at most, very few people on here work at a game studio? 

It takes work, but when the end product of that work is something shit it'll get pointed out as such. As will the other, plenty viable routes that the defenders of this film (primarily) can't seem to comprehend. 

[Ruomarta]

Welp, I know one thing. If that rumor is true about a trailer coming tomorrow, it's going to be one HELL of a day.

[SaturnWolf]

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.

[Alexios31]

1 minute ago, Ruomarta said:

Welp, I know one thing. If that rumor is true about a trailer coming tomorrow, it's going to be one HELL of a day.

I wish it was confirmed by the official Sonic twitter page.