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

[Hyp3hat]

34 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

There is no need to establish the plausibility of the base elements of the franchise because suspension of disbelief is a thing. We have had robots and animals interacting with humans together since like, animation was even a thing. Like, here. Here's a screenshot of this same thing being put on screen about 63 years ago (granted the robot is trashed):

 

I guaranteed you no one in the audience asked for an explanation about rabbit evolution or how modern robotics would support this scenario happening. It's a cartoon. It's fantasy. Suspension of disbelief. Most people are going to buy the concept at face value. Honestly, I don't know what it is about the Sonic fandom in recent years that thinks we need to spoonfeed audiences extraneous information to justify the mere concept of fantasy, but it just makes no sense to me to go that far.

When I was discussing plausibility, I was more going for 'reasons why everyone is doing things', but yeah, I phrased that straight up wrong. What I was thinking was, they should just avoid the kerfuffle that Rise Of Lyric did, in just having everyone there without really knowing what was going on. 

I don't think I'm advocating 'spoonfeeding', but y'know, some worldbuilding around this weird blue speedman, if only because I think it's easy enough to do. There's enough raw material to be made sense out of, at least. Then again, every attempt at explaining Sonic's speed has come off as weird (even Sonic The Comics version of events never seemed right as a kid) so I guess I'm conflicted. 

Although the reason we think of this extraneous information as essential is because it's essential to us in the hardcore fandom, which is difficult to look past.

[Nepenthe]

Well, you said that the writers would have their hands full trying to make talking animals plausible for the audience. Something humans have entertained for thousands of years with all sorts of gods and myths and fables is something that doesn't require in-depth explanation in a film to justify its existence for the human mind to understand and contextualize in the act of watching a film. This goes for superpowers too which are just magic, another thing we've been able to accept as a generalized concept for millennia. You don't need to explain Sonic's speed unless how he got his powers is integral to the point the film's trying to make. 

Explanations for fantastical concepts that are so well-worn through human history and culture that they're mere cliches are only needed when specific works opt in to engaging with the "hows?" and "whys?" for the sake of communicating a specific point. Take Zootopia: it's a film about modern theories of prejudice, thus it's necessary to create an evolutionary and historical context to better justify how the animals came about and why they act they way they do in order to communicate its more salient points. But this wasn't necessary for its predecessor Robin Hood which still remains a beloved Disney classic that everyone automatically understands.

Similarly, Sonic isn't interested in making larger philosophical points through the use of its base concepts. It's about using those base concepts as springboards for action plots. That's why I say when fans are insistent that general audiences need to be given excess information about the base concepts of a fantasy world that isn't interested in giving unnecessary answers to irrelevant questions, that they're asking for creators to spoonfeed people (I'm also not sure why hardcore fans are reliant on these types of questions in order to even begin to engage with the franchise anyway, since any answers a creator can give will almost never satisfy them anyway). I mean hell, America is a culturally Christian nation where one of the first parables of the religious text most people take stock in includes a talking snake. A talking hedgehog is not gonna blow anyone's minds away.

If you're talking about just avoiding RoL's general problems, well that can be solved by just writing these characters like any other decent cartoon character: present a situation that demands a choice and have them follow through with a decision that sensibly reflects their personality. That is literally Shadow's problem in the game: Not that he doesn't have a backstory with which to justify his character (more importantly, I don't know why his Sega backstory would be necessary in an alternate universe where the Sega canon obviously doesn't matter for shit since everyone's a blank slate), but rather there's no present reasons given for him trying to kill Sonic, so it's all just super-dee-duper dumb. This also goes for world-building which can be achieved by simply abiding by information established in previous entries. If you make Angel Island and its mysteries a recurring element across multiple works then you've successfully done some world-building, and it doesn't require explaining the physics of why Angel Island floats to achieve that.

[Shaddy Zaphod]

Well when it comes to Angel Island, if it's involved in the plot at all, you're probably not going to be waiting a long time to find out how it floats...

[Neo_Fire_Sonic]

On 4/25/2016 at 10:00 PM, Inspector Shaddy said:

Yeah, not Shadow. He's a sequel character.

no, if they want views they'd put in shadow

[Shaddy Zaphod]

Aaaaaaand we're officially right back where we started.

[Nepenthe]

Most Sonic characters are not household names and have more and more waning relevance with every passing game that comes and goes without them, and kids are attached to the main characters enough to drag their parents to see the film without him. Shadow- like any other secondary character- will not move significant amounts of people to go see this. Hell he won't even move me at this point to go see it, and I actually like him more than most people.

[Shadowlax]

24 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

Most Sonic characters are not household names and have more and more waning relevance with every passing game that comes and goes without them, and kids are attached to the main characters enough to drag their parents to see the film without him. Shadow- like any other secondary character- will not move significant amounts of people to go see this. Hell he won't even move me at this point to go see it, and I actually like him more than most people.

Eh, actually I could argue all your points with one simple thing about shadow. 

His design is amazing. You say popularity waning , but homie is still so popular they brought him along in boom van. Dudes design is actually so amazing that he has skirted around the waning relevance problem, there are people who shouldn't know or even care about this character that do , because his design is so damned good. His design is actually so good he has given people reason to investigate his character. You know a thread I regularly see in the steam forums about transformed, parents or people inquiring who he is. 

They struck out of the damned park with his design, i'm not saying that shadow would single handedly make this movie a hit. I'm not crazy enough to believe that. However, if shadow has mastered anything, its being mysterious cool guy that people want to investigate.  And if there are some unfamiliar kids like " YOOO WHO THE FUCK IS THAT" mission accomplished. I mean, that's kind of how he wormed his way into many of our hearts in the first place. That effect can definitely happen again, and it has with out sega even trying to do it. 

Marvel is doing that same thing with black panther. I'm not saying that BP is selling the film, but he certainly ain't hurting nothing. Homies books are selling out, got the toys lined up. Being a mysterious cool guy in the film can give you many opportunities if done well. 

[Nepenthe]

I guarantee if you randomly go out in any city and ask 50 people who Shadow The Hedgehog is, between 40 and 45 of them aren't going to know who you're talking about. They might deduce he has something to do with Sonic because he's a hedgehog, but a lightbulb won't off and give most people vivid imagery of this character's looks or history.

Granted, I'm not saying that Shadow doesn't have use or appeal and cannot be in a movie. I'm saying slapping him in there is not going to suddenly make people be all amazed and intrigued and suddenly go to see this film just from his presence alone, particularly in the age where anyone can go online to learn about the character and then suddenly be privy to all of the awfulness he's been apart of, not to mention the stigma that still exists for video game movies in general. All in all, Shadow as a concept is not some ace in the hole for box-office success here.

[Shadowlax]

10 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

I guarantee if you randomly go out in any city and ask 50 people who Shadow The Hedgehog is, between 40 and 45 of them aren't going to know who you're talking about. They might deduce he has something to do with Sonic because he's a hedgehog, but a lightbulb won't off and give most people vivid imagery of this character's looks or history.

Granted, I'm not saying that Shadow doesn't have use or appeal and cannot be in a movie. I'm saying slapping him in there is not going to suddenly make people be all amazed and intrigued and suddenly go to see this film just from his presence alone, particularly in the age where anyone can go online to learn about the character and then suddenly be privy to all of the awfulness he's been apart of, not to mention the stigma that still exists for video game movies in general. All in all, Shadow as a concept is not some ace in the hole for box-office success here.

To the top part, you can say that about most non pac man mario level characters to be quite honest, you can't use that as a berometer. There were people upset about ryu when ryu was leaked because they didn't know anything about street fighter. Does hat take anything anything away from street fighter's legacy and popularity? no . He is the progenator of an entire genre in one of the highest selling fighting games of all time, and there are some folks who don't know. He just isn't mario and that's totally fine. And don't think that's ever a good example to use. 

I never promised him to be some box office ace, I think he might be worth it in the long run. Also, to be quite honest you say people will instigate and " find out the awfulness" he's been in . They have already been doing that, he has newer younger fans, they like the characters and have been dissociated with all that and don't care. This isn't the first time this has happened in games either. To use another example from sf the rampant fanbase round certain characters in street fighter 3 despite not playing the games, but desiring them in future games. It happens quite a bit. 

Again never said he's going to carry the film, but he ain't gonna hurt is all i'm saying. 

[Nepenthe]

My argument isn't that his presence would hurt either. My argument is that this statement I was responding to--

51 minutes ago, Neo_Fire_Sonic said:

no, if they want views they'd put in shadow

-- is absurd, because there's nothing about Shadow on his own that is so popular beyond even the title character of the franchise (which makes it weird to compare Shadow to Ryu) that the studios involved in this producation can expect to see a noticeable increase in audience numbers simply by putting him in the film.

[Stardust]

If anything, the movie should move forward in the story of the characters, instead of just retelling their past all over again in a feature film.

1) BIOGRAPHIES - The characters' past can be summed up during dialogs and also in a few, very short flashbacks, just enough to inform new audiences of where the chars are coming from and what's their overall profile.

2) NARRATION - The childish tone that's been predominant in the franchise lately should also be dropped. You can make a movie suitable for teens and young adults without turning it into slapstick full of cheesy jokes. Yes, for young adults. A large part of Sonic's fanbase isn't comprised of little kids.

3) SCENARIO - The story also needs a significant scenario to be set. It can't just be random city A full of random citizens. It must be a region, country or world with some relevance to the plot. It can't be simply a backstage for Sonic and Eggman's perpetual fighting. Remember how in the 96's OVA the floating continents were in danger of being thrown into space by the actions of the villain (Metal Sonic)? And how the world was in itself an interesting place, a place that gave the impression of having a story of its own (Land of Darkness, full of ruins, human cities that disappeared under the sea. Land of the Sky, utopias where anthropomorphic animals and humans who survived the calamity now lived).

That's how the movie can make the audience believe Sonic has a reason to defend that world, rather than just being a place full of people the audience doesn't care about.

4) RELATIONSHIPS - Sonic and Tails are your inseparable friends. But there could be more development in the relationship of Sonic with the other characters. Do we really want to see Amy acting like a fangirl all the time, bashing stuff she doesn't like with her hammer? Or Knuckles acting like a guy who does nothing in life and occasionaly spars with Sonic? Is that all they have to offer? There's no drama, no reason for the audience to care about them at all? I mean, aren't they around 16 or 17 by now? Shouldn't they have a marginally interesting life?

5) THE HERO AND THE VILLAIN - Sonic should move on from being just a guy that's bored and fights Eggman to get rid of that boredom to a hero who finds a strong reason to fight seriously for something once in his life. That constant laid back attitude of not caring about anything and just going on an adventure because "it's fun" is not enough to turn him into the main character. 

And Eggman as a villain can't be restricted to a moustached evil villain with a maniac laughter. Much less a guy whose only ambition is the good old "destroy stuff, build an empire". He needs to translate into a real threat, into someone who genuinely poses a danger to the heroes.

6) THE VILLAINS - In plural, because Eggman alone doesn't constitute much of a threat anymore. Sonic's old nemesis, Metal Sonic, can easily figure as one of the villains as well. He's a much-beloved villain, so why not? The villains can be rivals or people who work alongside Eggman for their own selfish purposes. Or they could be an organised group. There are many possibilities. They should constitute a challenge for the heroes to defeat. Anything that adds layers to the characters and the story, so it'll have some meat.

Those are just a few simple examples of how a presumably good movie has to go beyond the ordinary "Bored-Sonic-runs-a-lot-and-then-fights-Eggman". And how, most importantly, it can't be a repetition of overused elements we are tired of seeing in the franchise. In other words, it has to show Sonic's life is moving on and the characters have a future. If Sony Pictures and Sega can pull that off, it remains to be seen. I hope so.

[Shadowlax]

4 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

My argument isn't that his presence would hurt either. My argument is that this statement I was responding to--

-- is absurd, because there's nothing about Shadow on his own that is so popular beyond even the title character of the franchise (which makes it weird to compare Shadow to Ryu) that the studios involved in this producation can expect to see a noticeable increase in audience numbers simply by putting him in the film.

I was just using ryu as an example of even ryu doesn't escape them " If you walk to people on the street " fate.. I think there are several reasons for that, but that goes into fighting him history and the rise of 3d game like tekken and a bunch of other stuff. My point was I don't think the street test is a good example, because more characters fail it than you would think.  There was a " name this smash character " video I remember and people were failing after mario and luigi.Walk to someone on the street level is like... mickey mouse. Is bugs bugs bunny type shit. No one is going to take anything away from your character if it isn't that level. 

[Nepenthe]

To be fair, this really only reinforces my point. Shadow- along with tons of other video characters- do not have a reasonable enough presence within the mainstream consciousness to justifiably say that their presence in a film alone will move significant amounts of people to seats. Video game franchises are pretty niche in terms of how their narratives and characters manage to permeate popular culture outside of a very select few like Mario and Sonic (not Tails, not Knuckles, not Shadow, and probably not even Eggman- just Sonic). A Sonic movie will ultimately survive best on positive word of mouth if it ends up being absolutely kick-ass, not on which characters appear in it. So putting in Shadow won't hurt anything if he's written well, but it won't necessarily help either.

[Shaddy Zaphod]

I think the way Shadow could be an appealing selling point is if one of the movies is an SA2 adaptation. Lots and lots of people played SA2(B) and it makes top sales whenever it's released. But Shadow alone isn't the only selling point to that game, whereas if you made a movie that was a clear adaptation of that game, you'd most likely win over the audience that loves SA2.

But that goes into my point about Shadow being a sequel-only character, since SA2 for the most part is a game that needs some of it's predecessor's context. Not saying anyone back in the day had it (what with it being the first Sonic game most Nintendo owners ever played), but nowadays people are going to be paying attention, and not having the proper info makes a poor first impression to newcomers.

[Neo_Fire_Sonic]

1 hour ago, Stardust said:

it can't be a repetition of overused elements

 

1 hour ago, Stardust said:

 Metal Sonic

yea how about no since he's been the villian too many times now, remember heroes, that one sonic riders game, and now even sonic boom

honestly they should introduce new characters maybe to make the thing fresh >.> seriously i don't really give two craps if the internet says this new person would be edgy and shizz

at this point tails is an edgy character

[Zaysho]

I think Shadow could be a worthy inclusion, but he wouldn't be a selling point--he's a niche character and the only people who would care about him being in the film at all are people who are already fans of him (and most of these people are already Sonic fans). The wider audience this film I assume is trying to reach will likely go see this at all because they at least know who Sonic is. Sure, Shadow's presence wouldn't hurt, a Sonic film could well get him some more fans even, but it wouldn't mean much to people with little knowledge about the series if this film is their first exposure to it at all. Unless the film's marketing really favors Shadow and has him shown alongside Sonic enough for people to make a connection and form any kind of interest, I just don't think his presence would matter until after people saw the movie. And this is before even getting into if he'd be utilized well.

[caseykz]

I rather they establish a good base first by focusing on a few characters first, then add team Dark for sequels. Characters with too much backstory can wait until the first/second film gets people interested. 

Anyway, we don't want to spoil it with too many characters. The audience would be overloaded. Examples? Avengers 2 wasn't as good as Avengers 1. The first sonic megaman crossover was better than the second. (My opinion)

[Shadowlax]

18 hours ago, Hyp3hat said:

 

 

11 hours ago, Nepenthe said:

To be fair, this really only reinforces my point. Shadow- along with tons of other video characters- do not have a reasonable enough presence within the mainstream consciousness to justifiably say that their presence in a film alone will move significant amounts of people to seats. Video game franchises are pretty niche in terms of how their narratives and characters manage to permeate popular culture outside of a very select few like Mario and Sonic (not Tails, not Knuckles, not Shadow, and probably not even Eggman- just Sonic). A Sonic movie will ultimately survive best on positive word of mouth if it ends up being absolutely kick-ass, not on which characters appear in it. So putting in Shadow won't hurt anything if he's written well, but it won't necessarily help either.

Thats fair. Wont fight that.

 

To bring up anothrr topic, what do you think the human roles will be?.

[Shaddy Zaphod]

Hopefully nothing significant.

[a knothole resident]

Well, this probably alludes to how much the Sonic Movie will bomb.  http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2016/04/film_critics_arent_being_kind_to_the_ratchet_and_clank_movie

[FriendBot]

4 minutes ago, a knothole resident said:

Well, this probably alludes to how much the Sonic Movie will bomb.  http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2016/04/film_critics_arent_being_kind_to_the_ratchet_and_clank_movie

Based on what? We don't know anything about the Sonic movie outside that it's CGI/Live-action and Van is aiming for a PG-13 rating, which can be hinting towards a more action-focused movie that's somewhat serious. 

So the Ratchet & Clank movie is slaughtered by the critics but that's because the movie isn't really aimed at a general audience but rather the fans of the series. That's fine and dandy and all but if you're going to make a movie only for the fans, then making it a theatrical picture is not the best way. But I'm saying this as someone who hasn't touched a non-Sonic platforming game for quite a while.

[Nepenthe]

The Ratchet and Clank movie isn't really comparable beyond source material, thus it isn't useful for determining how the Sonic film is going to go. Or rather, if the Sonic film is bad, Ratchet and Clank will have nothing to do with it.

[DaddlerTheDalek]

22 minutes ago, a knothole resident said:

Well, this probably alludes to how much the Sonic Movie will bomb.  http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2016/04/film_critics_arent_being_kind_to_the_ratchet_and_clank_movie

I saw the Ratchet & Clank movie today. I thought it was simple fun.

[Kuzu]

I doubt this film will do well, but whether or not it does has nothing to do with how Ratchet and Clank performed.

[Blacklightning]

On 22/03/2016 at 6:53 PM, Blacklightning said:

That might be a point worth considering if you could name even one person working on both films.

You've done this before, and my reply to the previous attempt is still just as relevant, it seems.