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

[CaptainRobo]

Here is all we know about the movie so far:

-The film will be directed by Tim Miller's partner, Jeff Fowler and this will be his first feature film that he will directed.

-Neal H. Moritz (Fast and Furious, XXX, Vantage Point, Goosebumps, Stealth, The Green Hornet, 21 Jump Street, 22 Jump Street, Battle: Los Angeles, and SWAT) is the producer of the movie. 

-Marza and Blur Studio are both working on the animation for the movie.

-Tim Miller (Deadpool and Terminator 6) is the executive producer.

-Script which was previously written by Van and his partner Evan (Fist Fight) now written by Patrick Casey and Josh Miller (Golan the Insatiable)

-Paramount is distributing the movie and will work closely with Sega of America according to the Paramount CEO.

-Filming will start in July.

-A logo which could possibly be a placeholder logo.

-Movie expected to be released in theaters next November.

So, we still yet to know who will be casted for this film. I hear that the director is currently assembling a crew in the preparation of filming. 

 

 

[PeterPancake]

 

Edit: 

Edited May 2, 2018 by PeterPancake

[Graystripe2000]

3 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

 

Edit: 

???

[PeterPancake]

16 hours ago, CaptainRobo said:

I could see the plot of the movie take some inspiration from various Sonic games. It could be a mix of plots of games like Sonic Adventure. 

My bets are that Sonic and his friends could look like this.:

or this:

Since, Paramount is distributing the movie, they also did the Spongebob movie that come out two years ago. Maybe the animation will be similar to that. Marza and Blur Studio are involved.:

Speaking of the MCU, I could see GUN as Sonic's version of SHIELD in the movie. They are both government organizations.

Paramount also made this:

And this 

And this

The Sponge out of Water film looked the way it did because it was PG-Rated film aimed strictly at 7-11 year old children much like a animated Sonic movie would be. Sonic isn't going to look like a CG model ripped out of the game and put into a movie like those examples. If this movie has any chance of being taken seriously by the GA, Sonic's design will inevitably require some changes to appeal to the Blockbuster crowd. Even Van admitted in the past that Sonic's design WILL change although not as radical as Bayturtles or Transformers. But it's going to change; it's just the nature of the beast. The examples you cited are what Sonic would look like in a Space Jam sequel not a PG-13 Action adventure adaptation of the Sonic franchise.

My bet is Sonic gets more realistic textures (and not just on his fur like that pic), his cartoon-ish proportions get toned down and his shoes look more Alien - Like they did in Sonic Adventure 2. He will need to look like something that could feasibly exist biologically much like how Marvel Studios adapted Groot, Rocket, Thanos, Howard the Duck and other cartoony characters and it will need to look badass while not straying too far from the iconic image of Sonic which basically boils down to blue fur. quills, peach colored arms, muzzle and belly and green eyes. The aesthetics around those traits will probably be changed.

Even in the new Power Rangers movie, the Rangers got a design update because the Sentai suits would have been laughed out of theaters:

 

And Marza being involved does not dictate Sonic's design. The director will send a design patent out to different concept artists and they will have to collaborate with the director, producers, Sega AND Paramount  (the latter of whom who are actually making the movie in studio) to create Sonic's look. Blur is doing the animation and they've worked on live action films in the past.

[AstroSeedP]

Eh, it depends. SEGA was really strict with BRB's Sonic redesigns for Boom.

[Sega DogTagz]

I would seriously doubt that we would see anything more significant that a little extra fur textures. Maybe some new accessories (like a backpack, a fancy wristwatch/communicator or a next-gen pair of Soap Shoes) but Sega has made it very clear over the years that they simply don't tolerate over the top changes to their brand design philosophy. I don't think we have to worry about anything as close to drastic that some of the other franchises went through to make the jump to the big screen. Mickey Mouse or Bugs Bunny wouldn't need a redesign to fit into a movie theater. Timeless designs are timeless for a reason.

On top of that, this is Marza we are dealing with. They could have handed this project off to any animation studio - but they chose the people with the experience animating Sonic's current design. That's got to count for something.

[PeterPancake]

48 minutes ago, Sega DogTagz said:

I would seriously doubt that we would see anything more significant that a little extra fur textures. Maybe some new accessories (like a backpack, a fancy wristwatch/communicator or a next-gen pair of Soap Shoes) but Sega has made it very clear over the years that they simply don't tolerate over the top changes to their brand design philosophy. I don't think we have to worry about anything as close to drastic that some of the other franchises went through to make the jump to the big screen. Mickey Mouse or Bugs Bunny wouldn't need a redesign to fit into a movie theater. Timeless designs are timeless for a reason.

On top of that, this is Marza we are dealing with. They could have handed this project off to any animation studio - but they chose the people with the experience animating Sonic's current design. That's got to count for something.

Here's the thing though - Paramount bought the Movie RIGHTS from Sega. That means they have a license to make Sonic movies. This is nothing like the Big Red Button situation (An inexperienced Studio developing a game that is still being published by Sega) This is not Sonic Boom we're talking about - this is a live action blockbuster adaption of the series that strives to become a major franchise not only for Sega but for Paramount as well. Sega has the most veto power but Paramount does too because legally they own the rights to make Sonic movies. They are the ones making it. A box-office bomb will have a very bad affect on their already declining box-office profits hence why they picked up the movie rights in the first place. 

 

Sega wants to branch out, they have to have realized that going the route they've chosen to take with the Sonic film, certain elements will need to be reinvented to appeal to a wider audience.. Do you know why Bugs Bunny's design didn't change in Space Jam? Because that was the ENTIRE POINT of the movie. Cartoon characters co-existing with human beings. The point of humor; the gimmick was the absurdity of the concept. This movie isn't doing that. Sonic can NOT show up looking like Mickey Mouse's brother-in-law pulled straight out of the games if they want this movie to be more than a parody of the franchise like Space Jam or Sponge out of Water. His design won't necessarily be changed as drastically as the Bay Turtles or Transformers but it will need more than just realistic fur on the blue sections of his body. The only thing that will be necessary is keeping the key elements of his design intact.

 

It's insane to think that the design aesthetic of the movie will look like this:

If the movie tried to sell Sonic as a PG-13, action adventure film looking like that - NOBODY besides fans would even take the movie seriously. In fact, I'm willing to bet it would become a meme. There's a reason why the guys who made Fast & Furous, Deadpool and Battle Los Angeles are the ones behind this movie.

And Marza is not doing the animation, Blur Studios is whom have a long history of working on blockbusters and realistic CG trailers for video games. 

[Sega DogTagz]

3 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

If the movie tried to sell Sonic as a PG-13, action adventure film looking like that - NOBODY besides fans would even take the movie seriously. In fact, I'm willing to bet it would become a meme. There's a reason why the guys who made Fast & Furous, Deadpool and Battle Los Angeles are the ones behind this movie.

The entire reason for bringing in a guy with a Deadpool and a F&F background is to create an action spectacle that doesn't have to take itself seriously in the first place.

F&F has scenes with the heroes driving supercars between skyscrapers. Deadpool is self aware and referential cranked up to 11. If the directional talent of this Sonic movie is leaning in that direction, then Sonic's core design doesn't need a massive overhaul to "fit in" because its not trying to fit it. It knows what it is.

 

3 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

And Marz  is not doing the animation, Blue Studios is whom have a long history of working on blockbusters and realistic CG trailers for video games. 

Marza is listed as one of the collaborating companies alongside Blur Studio (assuming you made a typo with Blue).

Marza only does one thing. If they are a part of this movie, they will be heavily involved in the animation / CG workload.

[PeterPancake]

30 minutes ago, Sega DogTagz said:

The entire reason for bringing in a guy with a Deadpool and a F&F background is to create an action spectacle that doesn't have to take itself seriously in the first place.

F&F has scenes with the heroes driving supercars between skyscrapers. Deadpool is self aware and referential cranked up to 11. If the directional talent of this Sonic movie is leaning in that direction, then Sonic's core design doesn't need a massive overhaul to "fit in" because its not trying to fit it. It knows what it is.

 

Marza is listed as one of the collaborating companies alongside Blur Studio (assuming you made a typo with Blue).

Marza only does one thing. If they are a part of this movie, they will be heavily involved in the animation / CG workload.

Avengers has scenes with purple aliens trying to collect rainbow colored stones to wipe out half of the universe - that doesn't mean the gist of it can't be presented with a sense of weight and realism which is what those F&F films do. That action scene when the cars drop out of the plane or the giant car/tank hybrid busting out of the ice would never happen in real life but the movie didn't present it in a wacky, cartoony way which is what Sonic looking like he belongs in Space Jam 3: Rise of Bugs Bunny would be like. Deadpool is self aware with raunchy humor and unrealistic things happening, correct - but does the movie present in a Looney Tunes-esque aesthetic? Does Deadpool run away super fast and leave a puff of smoke behind shaped in his silhouette? Does Colossus look like belongs in  an animated kids TV show? Ermm...No. Deadpool is presented in a hyper-realistic world that is STILL grounded in real life. Even his suit/costume which is very comic accurate has been grounded in reality. Precisely TO fit into the real world as you mentioned.

What I think we should expect from Tim Miller is to give Sonic a certain comedic edge that you wouldn't see in an animated movie aimed at 8 year olds. Much like how Classic Sonic was back in the day. That doesnt mean he will have Sonic running around animated to look like he belongs in the Looney Tunes Thanksgiving special like a satire of video game characters. It just wouldn't wok for anybody outside the fandom. Again, I'm not saying Sonic will get MAJOR design overhaul but it won't be as minor as those pics that guy posted on the last page; it won't be presented as a great big in joke because the movie will become a laughing stock in way that Sega, Paramount and Tim Miller did not intend. I'm willing to bet that Sonic will be changed in way that makes him look more badass to the masses while still feasibly looking like he belongs in the real world.

 

And I'm positive that the Press-release mentioned Blur doing the animation.  Marza will probably be there to assist them.

[Sega DogTagz]

28 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

Avengers has scenes with purple aliens trying to collect rainbow colored stones to wipe out half of the universe - that doesn't mean the gist of it can't be presented with a sense of weight and realism which is what those F&F films do. That action scene when the cars drop out of the plane or the giant car/tank hybrid busting out of the ice would never happen in real life but the movie didn't present it in a wacky, cartoony way which is what Sonic looking like he belongs in Space Jam 3: Rise of Bugs Bunny would be like. Deadpool is self aware with raunchy humor and unrealistic things happening, correct - but does the movie present in a Looney Tunes-esque aesthetic? Does Deadpool run away super fast and leave a puff of smoke behind shaped in his silhouette? Does Colossus look like belongs in  an animated kids TV show? Ermm...No. Deadpool is presented in a hyper-realistic world that is STILL grounded in real life. Even his suit/costume which is very comic accurate has been grounded in reality. Precisely TO fit into the real world as you mentioned.

What I think we should expect from Tim Miller is to give Sonic a certain comedic edge that you wouldn't see in an animated movie aimed at 8 year olds. Much like how Classic Sonic was back in the day. That doesnt mean he will have Sonic running around animated to look like he belongs in the Looney Tunes Thanksgiving special like a satire of video game characters. It just wouldn't wok for anybody outside the fandom. Again, I'm not saying Sonic will get MAJOR design overhaul but it won't be as minor as those pics that guy posted on the last page; it won't be presented as a great big in joke because the movie will become a laughing stock in way that Sega, Paramount and Tim Miller did not intend. I'm willing to bet that Sonic will be changed in way that makes him look more badass to the masses while still feasibly looking like he belongs in the real world.

But in both F&F and Deadpool, neither franchise put any effort into conforming what they were to meet audience expectations. Pool is a snarky bombastic character so thats what they delivered. F&F is car porn, so thats what they went out and did. Creative choices, setpieces, dialog, none of that was limited by mainstream expectations or a need to conform to something. Not physics, not realism, not nothing. They both represent franchises that know what they are, know what they came in to do, and executed with a dedicated mentality. They didn't try to be something else.

The Sonic movie needs to be no different. If it knows that its a movie about a fast cracking and a fast moving Hedgehog, then you can bet the devs behind it, who have a history of not caving in or conforming, will feel no additional pressure to start getting weak in the knees now. If the action is fast and cool, who cares that the aircraft runway had to be about 25 miles long what it looks like. If it delivers what it sets out to do, everything else is second fiddle.

 

28 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

And I'm positive that the Press-release mentioned Blur doing the animation.  Marza will probably be there to assist them.

 

Here is a snippet of that release

Quote

 

Planned for a worldwide release showcasing both live-action and CG animation elements, the feature film will be the first time Sonic has been adapted for the big screen. Developing the project since its inception as a producer as well as a production house, MARZA Animation Planet Co., Ltd., owned by SEGA Group, will be joined by an assembly of high-profile talent.

The film has signed on notable industry veterans including:

• Producer Neal H. Moritz from Original Film Inc. (”Fast and Furious” series)
• Director Jeff Fowler (Blur Studio, Academy Award® nominee for 2005 Best Animated Short Film “Gopher Broke.”)
• Executive producer Tim Miller (director of the Marvel/Fox feature “Deadpool” and owner of animation and CG production company Blur Studio) 

“I’m thrilled to be partnered with SEGA and to have such an incredible and supportive home for Sonic with Jim and Paramount,” said Moritz.

 

So that confirms that Marza has been working on the movie since its Inception. ThatsWAY before either of the producers or either of the other animation studios came on board. Marza has been doing the leg work from day 1, and as such I would expect their fingerprints/DNA to be all over what we have to show for it today. If anything Blur is doing the assisting.

Blur Studios came on as a tag along with the Exec. Producer. They haven't been a part of this project as long as Marza. Who takes the majority of the reigns moving forward is anyone guess, but if we are going to go by the work, storyboarding and concept art that has been done to date, there is no doubt Marza would have the single biggest impact.

[CaptainRobo]

You know, it's will be funny if Sonic Drive-In did a promotion for the movie, maybe giving away free chili dogs for one day.

It wouldn't be the first time, they did something to promote a movie. They did promote the latest Transformers movie by offering these slushes for a limited time.:

They did make a commercial out of it, which I could see them making a commercial for the movie.:

 

7 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

 

Edit: 

What were you trying to say?

[PeterPancake]

1 hour ago, Sega DogTagz said:

But in both F&F and Deadpool, neither franchise put any effort into conforming what they were to meet audience expectations. Pool is a snarky bombastic character so thats what they delivered. F&F is car porn, so thats what they went out and did. Creative choices, setpieces, dialog, none of that was limited by mainstream expectations or a need to conform to something. Not physics, not realism, not nothing. They both represent franchises that know what they are, know what they came in to do, and executed with a dedicated mentality. They didn't try to be something else.

The Sonic movie needs to be no different. If it knows that its a movie about a fast cracking and a fast moving Hedgehog, then you can bet the devs behind it, who have a history of not caving in or conforming, will feel no additional pressure to start getting weak in the knees now. If the action is fast and cool, who cares that the aircraft runway had to be about 25 miles long what it looks like. If it delivers what it sets out to do, everything else is second fiddle.

 

 

Here is a snippet of that release

So that confirms that Marza has been working on the movie since its Inception. ThatsWAY before either of the producers or either of the other animation studios came on board. Marza has been doing the leg work from day 1, and as such I would expect their fingerprints/DNA to be all over what we have to show for it today. If anything Blur is doing the assisting.

Blur Studios came on as a tag along with the Exec. Producer. They haven't been a part of this project as long as Marza. Who takes the majority of the reigns moving forward is anyone guess, but if we are going to go by the work, storyboarding and concept art that has been done to date, there is no doubt Marza would have the single biggest impact.

(This would be so much easier f I knew how to break up posts into segments)

Addressing your first point, I think you're confusing conformity aka Creative liberty - with - production design, aesthetic and the overall presentation of the movie. Fast & Furious is what it is and does what does  WELL. But how does the movie present itself to the general audience? It does not look like a joke or some silly satire about cars. Here's what i mean; The action is implausible In real life, most of the crazy stuff that happens in those movies is impossible in the real world but the stunt coordinators and CG artists try to the best of their ability TO make it feel and look real. This is filmmaking 101, suspension of disbelief. That suspension would be shattered in a PG-13 Action film (like F&F) where the main protagonist doesn't even look like he belongs in the same environment he inhibits. ESPECIALLY when he's going to be sharing screen time with real life human being. And going back to F&Fs - quite frankly there is no need to conform to the general audience's expectations because the average movie goer bought what they were selling over a decade ago which was wayyy less extravagant and crazy than it is now. And it is not the equelivant of having Sonic look like a cartoon. Regarding Sonic being made into something it isn't - There's this thing called "adaptation" and what that means is taking an existing property and telling your own story with it, taking elements from whatever source material and filtering those elements through your vision. That's what all comic book movies, Nostaligia properties (TMNT, TF) ETC are. Thats not "trying to be something different" or something it's not. What is Sonic? What is the core of the franchise? An anthropomorphic blue Hedgehog who runs really fast and fights robots/badniks created by a guy called Dr. Eggman who wants to reinvent the world in his image. That's Sonic, in reality any adaptation could use those core essentials and change many of the elements surrounding and it would STILL be Sonic. But I doubt this movie will be a radical reinvention like that. 

 

You're speaking as if the Studio that makes the movie shouldn't care whatsoever how it will be perceived by the MAJORITY of the people who are going to be buying tickets, to the people who dictate whether the movie succeeds or fails. There's a reason why the G1 designs were not used in the Bayformer films, why Captain America, Iron Man, Thor and pretty much every hero in the MCU got a design update from the comics that didn't look ridiculous, why the Power Rangers movie ditched the Sentai suits, why pretty much every adaptation that strives to be a blockbuster film has to look PRESENTABLE to the people who will make up 97%. Of the worldwide box-office gross. Even Deadpool's suit was given additional detail & elements to make him look more presentable to the main audience and not like a cartoon character he was in the comics. Sonic looking like he came out of the changing room from the set of Who Framed Roger rabbit Is just not happening. There's too much at stake. A live action PG-13 Sonic the Hedgehog movie is more of a risk than Deadpool and Guardians of the Galaxy combined. The movie at least has to look like something most people won't laugh out of theaters.

 

And Marza being involved before Blur doesn't mean anything. The movie prior to Tim Miller hadn't even started proper development yet. The most they could'v came up with is a proof of concept animation test. There was no director, producer or anyone on the movie. Even the script was retooled from what it was. The article that confirmed it would start filming in July mentioned Blur would be doing the animation for the movie which makes wayyy more sense for a multitude of reasons than Marza. Mainly being their relationsip with Jeff Fowler and Tim Miller and experience working on Blockbuster films. (They even did work on Deadpool) 

[Blueknight V2.0]

1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

(This would be so much easier f I knew how to break up posts into segments)

Addressing your first point, I think you're confusing conformity aka Creative liberty - with - production design, aesthetic and the overall presentation of the movie. Fast & Furious is what it is and does what does  WELL. But how does the movie present itself to the general audience? It does not look like a joke or some silly satire about cars. Here's what i mean; The action is implausible In real life, most of the crazy stuff that happens in those movies is impossible in the real world but the stunt coordinators and CG artists try to the best of their ability TO make it feel and look real. This is filmmaking 101, suspension of disbelief. That suspension would be shattered in a PG-13 Action film (like F&F) where the main protagonist doesn't even look like he belongs in the same environment he inhibits. ESPECIALLY when he's going to be sharing screen time with real life human being. And going back to F&Fs - quite frankly there is no need to conform to the general audience's expectations because the average movie goer bought what they were selling over a decade ago which was wayyy less extravagant and crazy than it is now. And it is not the equelivant of having Sonic look like a cartoon. Regarding Sonic being made into something it isn't - There's this thing called "adaptation" and what that means is taking an existing property and telling your own story with it, taking elements from whatever source material and filtering those elements through your vision. That's what all comic book movies, Nostaligia properties (TMNT, TF) ETC are. Thats not "trying to be something different" or something it's not. What is Sonic? What is the core of the franchise? An anthropomorphic blue Hedgehog who runs really fast and fights robots/badniks created by a guy called Dr. Eggman who wants to reinvent the world in his image. That's Sonic, in reality any adaptation could use those core essentials and change many of the elements surrounding and it would STILL be Sonic. But I doubt this movie will be a radical reinvention like that. 

 

You're speaking as if the Studio that makes the movie shouldn't care whatsoever how it will be perceived by the MAJORITY of the people who are going to be buying tickets, to the people who dictate whether the movie succeeds or fails. There's a reason why the G1 designs were not used in the Bayformer films, why Captain America, Iron Man, Thor and pretty much every hero in the MCU got a design update from the comics that didn't look ridiculous, why the Power Rangers movie ditched the Sentai suits, why pretty much every adaptation that strives to be a blockbuster film has to look PRESENTABLE to the people who will make up 97%. Of the worldwide box-office gross. Even Deadpool's suit was given additional detail & elements to make him look more presentable to the main audience and not like a cartoon character he was in the comics. Sonic looking like he came out of the changing room from the set of Who Framed Roger rabbit Is just not happening. There's too much at stake. A live action PG-13 Sonic the Hedgehog movie is more of a risk than Deadpool and Guardians of the Galaxy combined. The movie at least has to look like something most people won't laugh out of theaters.

 

And Marza being involved before Blur doesn't mean anything. The movie prior to Tim Miller hadn't even started proper development yet. The most they could'v came up with is a proof of concept animation test. There was no director, producer or anyone on the movie. Even the script was retooled from what it was. The article that confirmed it would start filming in July mentioned Blur would be doing the animation for the movie which makes wayyy more sense for a multitude of reasons than Marza. Mainly being their relationsip with Jeff Fowler and Tim Miller and experience working on Blockbuster films. (They even did work on Deadpool) 

Yes guys Sonic as well as the rest of the cast have to fit in with the right textures and animations to look presentable. Like the difference between Shadow and Sonic 2006, Shadow took place in a cartoony/darker version of Sonic's world, while 2006 took place in a more realistic Sonic world where the characters did not fit in even Eggman.

You guys also keep mentioning the director of of the Transformers and the new TMNT movies, he actually one of the planned directors for a CG/live action Ratchet & Clank movie around the time that Deadlocked released. Imagine if R&C got that kind of treatment, that would've ruined the franchise and we probably would've never seen the Future series or the PS4 game. Now as for fitting in Ratchet, Clank, Qwark, Nefarious and whoever else they wanted in it, would not have fit in with human characters as there are none in the games. Now at least the movie we got looked and stayed true to the games (however would've been even better with TJ Fixman's script), now I know the movies story was heavily based on that of the original game with some changes. Then you have the Angry Birds movie which is changed up a lot and added an origin story when there was no story to begin with. Now that's where Sonic's story comes in, we can't have just a retelling of certain games events like R&C, no question about it I liked the updated origin story but lost some of it's lore and story when the director handled the script, therefore people who never played the games didn't know who the characters were and what was going on because some felt it moved to quickly. It needs to be a new, never-before seen story like the Angry Birds movie, showcasing the beginning of Sonic and Eggman's rivalry as well as other elements from the series like Chaos, Metal Sonic etc. to attract a bigger audience. But me I expect the universe in the Sonic movie to be a cross between the darker tone/ mix of cartoony and reality (this i'm reffering to Eggman's design being different than the other humans in Shadow) of Shadow the Hedgehog (certain things not included, I think you guys know what I mean) with the story structure of the Adventure series and the CG from Sonic Unleashed.

That's just what I think though, they might come up with something no one would expect, but I think we all could agree that the film will have a Super Sonic finale. Concerning animation company, I think both Marza and Blur are completely trustworthy for the film's animation, now if their working together their CG animation will look like the CG cutscenes from Sonic 2006 but more fitting for the real world. Shadow's CG cutscenes were handled by Blur, Marza wasn't involved with the Sonic series at the time. As long as the film has a good story, stellar peformance, proper Sonic cast designs and an epic soundtrack it will be a film that will satisfy the biggest fans and the most negative of critics. There is enough Sonic material to make a Sonic cinematic universe, even the possibility of a movie for Shadow. Now if the Sonic movie is successful then it will have to compete with the likes of Jurassic World and Avengers to take a spot in the top 10 highest grossing movies of all time, and would still have to compete with Warcraft, Angry Birds and Rampage for the top spot of video game films in which case if done right Sonic could easily overtake any of those.

[CaptainRobo]

If there are any car chases in the film, I could see Eggman used something similar like this.:

He would be using it to crush cars and fire missiles at Sonic and his friends in a car to stop them. LOL.

[Sega DogTagz]

12 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

(This would be so much easier f I knew how to break up posts into segments)

Click inside the quote box then hammer the enter key a few times where you want to break up some text.

 

12 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

Addressing your first point, I think you're confusing conformity aka Creative liberty - with - production design, aesthetic and the overall presentation of the movie. Fast & Furious is what it is and does what does  WELL. But how does the movie present itself to the general audience? It does not look like a joke or some silly satire about cars. Here's what i mean; The action is implausible In real life, most of the crazy stuff that happens in those movies is impossible in the real world but the stunt coordinators and CG artists try to the best of their ability TO make it feel and look real. This is filmmaking 101, suspension of disbelief. That suspension would be shattered in a PG-13 Action film (like F&F) where the main protagonist doesn't even look like he belongs in the same environment he inhibits. ESPECIALLY when he's going to be sharing screen time with real life human being. And going back to F&Fs - quite frankly there is no need to conform to the general audience's expectations because the average movie goer bought what they were selling over a decade ago which was wayyy less extravagant and crazy than it is now. And it is not the equelivant of having Sonic look like a cartoon. Regarding Sonic being made into something it isn't - There's this thing called "adaptation" and what that means is taking an existing property and telling your own story with it, taking elements from whatever source material and filtering those elements through your vision. That's what all comic book movies, Nostaligia properties (TMNT, TF) ETC are. Thats not "trying to be something different" or something it's not. What is Sonic? What is the core of the franchise? An anthropomorphic blue Hedgehog who runs really fast and fights robots/badniks created by a guy called Dr. Eggman who wants to reinvent the world in his image. That's Sonic, in reality any adaptation could use those core essentials and change many of the elements surrounding and it would STILL be Sonic. But I doubt this movie will be a radical reinvention like that. 

Creative Liberty when taken too far breaks the mold and can twist backwards into something else entirely. You needn't look any farther than the Sonic cartoon series to see a great example of that. Each of them features our Blue Little Hedgehog fighting against the villainy of Eggman. Core established. Yes, its all Sonic. Yet one is a sitcom, one is a darker interconnected drama and another still is a Saturday morning sing-a-long.

Will the directer have some degree of creative liberty? Sure, but recent history has shown us that Sega does not wish to have their source material twisted too far from its status quo. Its why BRB was banned from making Sonic wear pants. Its why the comics have mandates in the first place. They have a solid track record as of late of stepping in and protecting their IP.

 

And suspension of disbeleif works on may levels. Sonic doesn't have to look like he belongs in our environment in order for it to work. In fact, what he is and what he can do can be acceptable because he doesn't look like he belongs, if its presented correctly.

 

 

12 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

You're speaking as if the Studio that makes the movie shouldn't care whatsoever how it will be perceived by the MAJORITY of the people who are going to be buying tickets, to the people who dictate whether the movie succeeds or fails. There's a reason why the G1 designs were not used in the Bayformer films, why Captain America, Iron Man, Thor and pretty much every hero in the MCU got a design update from the comics that didn't look ridiculous, why the Power Rangers movie ditched the Sentai suits, why pretty much every adaptation that strives to be a blockbuster film has to look PRESENTABLE to the people who will make up 97%. Of the worldwide box-office gross. Even Deadpool's suit was given additional detail & elements to make him look more presentable to the main audience and not like a cartoon character he was in the comics. Sonic looking like he came out of the changing room from the set of Who Framed Roger rabbit Is just not happening. There's too much at stake. A live action PG-13 Sonic the Hedgehog movie is more of a risk than Deadpool and Guardians of the Galaxy combined. The movie at least has to look like something most people won't laugh out of theaters.

 

If the writing is clever and the animation is solid, then there would be no reason to laugh it out of theaters. There are much worse things they could do to Sonic than present him looking as their VG counterparts.

If anything, movies like Bay's TMNT that go too far to try and conform face more scrutiny for their redesigns than anything else. I can't imagine anyone, fans or general audience looking at those turtles and somehow feel like they enhance the movie going experience.

 

12 hours ago, PeterPancake said:

And Marza being involved before Blur doesn't mean anything. The movie prior to Tim Miller hadn't even started proper development yet. The most they could'v came up with is a proof of concept animation test. There was no director, producer or anyone on the movie. Even the script was retooled from what it was. The article that confirmed it would start filming in July mentioned Blur would be doing the animation for the movie which makes wayyy more sense for a multitude of reasons than Marza. Mainly being their relationsip with Jeff Fowler and Tim Miller and experience working on Blockbuster films. (They even did work on Deadpool) 

 

There was enough on the table to impress the Paramount exec who brought the rights to the movie and brought it onboard under his umbrella. Anything and everything he saw had to come from Marza in collaboration with Sony pictures. There had to be some work done already, maybe some pre-alpha stuff, but whatever it was, you can bet it would have had Marza's fingerprints all over it.

And any reason you can give my for Blur making more sense doing the animation can be countered. Sure Blur has a clear connection to the directing cast, but Marza is a Sega subsidiary. The guys who own the IP. Blur may have experience working with big movies, but they cant measure up to Marza who've had a decade+ of experience animating for Sonic himself.

Blur is a large enough studio insomuch that it wouldn't exactly need "help" producing a hybrid live action CG movie. What that tells me is, that the only reason Marza is here is because they understand the IP and as such I am willing to bet that their consistent vision of how Sonic should look and move will be carried over into the movie.

[CaptainRobo]

Right, Sonic doesn't need to be realistic. Not trying to argue, it's depend on Sega's decision on the designs, the Paramount CEO say that they will work closely with Sega of America. Nothing in the movie had to be serious and realistic. It just had to be exciting and fun. The movie is designed for the families to enjoy and laugh. Like this scene from Fate of the Furious, it's looked unrealistic, but it's exciting and fun. Lot of CGI in this scene.

 

[Sonic Fan J]

The above conversation and the argument for realism and the comparisons to TMNT and Transformers brings me to probably my next primary concern outside of it just looking like it fell into the uncanny valley; the audience surrogate and their story line.

Where as TMNT and Transformers have always had human characters and their own story lines and arcs, Sonic has only ever really had Eggman. If you're doing a live action/CG mixture though it becomes obvious that your making Earth the setting and if Sonic is coming over from his world a la Sonic X you can bet there is going to be a surrogate character who is going to eat up run time and have their own ongoing story line which has little to do with Sonic and Eggman beyond them being a stepping stone to resolving their own problems. It's a very common trope I see with audience surrogate characters and one I find very unenjoyable. Now if they use G.U.N I could see that being circumvented but I don't particularly have high hopes since even purely Earth-based movies like the Forbidden Kingdom (w/Jackie Chan and Jet Li) and the 47 Ronin (starring Keanu Reeves) had audience surrogate characters to bridge the cultural divide apparent in the stories. In light of that I can't help but fear having to deal with an annoying audience surrogate character since those are the type that Hollywood seems to enjoy using the most (looking at you Witwicky).

Sorry if I'm being a Negative Nancy here but I just can't see this movie working.

[tailsBOOM!]

It should be more realistic than Boom's 3d animations, but STILL keep true to their cartoony designs.  Doing a perfect mix of the two should work! 

[Sega DogTagz]

17 minutes ago, Sonic Fan J said:

TL;DR

Chris Thorndyke.

That's all you had to say lol

 

But I am right there with you. They are going to have to hire a small handful of actors in this movie - and one of them is going to have to serve at the bridge... mouthpiece... connective tissue... whatever between Sonic and the audience. We all already know that this could go south real quick.

I think the key here is tempering that kids role (cause it will be a young teen) into something that isn't unrealistic. Chris immediately supplanted 90% of the cast and took on their character specific roles and duties. This movie shouldn't look to make that same mistake. Sonic doesn't need another best friend, nor a moral compass.

 

The smart thing to do is cast a black kid. Cause everybody likes Danny.

 

lol

[PeterPancake]

4 hours ago, CaptainRobo said:

Right, Sonic doesn't need to be realistic. Not trying to argue, it's depend on Sega's decision on the designs, the Paramount CEO say that they will work closely with Sega of America. Nothing in the movie had to be serious and realistic. It just had to be exciting and fun. The movie is designed for the families to enjoy and laugh. Like this scene from Fate of the Furious, it's looked unrealistic, but it's exciting and fun. Lot of CGI in this scene.

 

That scene does look "realistic". The cars, lighting and space are all rendered to look real. Sonic looking like a video game model ripped out of the game is something completely different from that. That's not being"non-realistic" the same way of that scene 

[PeterPancake]

5 hours ago, Sega DogTagz said:

Click inside the quote box then hammer the enter key a few times where you want to break up some text.

 

Creative Liberty when taken too far breaks the mold and can twist backwards into something else entirely. You needn't look any farther than the Sonic cartoon series to see a great example of that. Each of them features our Blue Little Hedgehog fighting against the villainy of Eggman. Core established. Yes, its all Sonic. Yet one is a sitcom, one is a darker interconnected drama and another still is a Saturday morning sing-a-long.

Will the directer have some degree of creative liberty? Sure, but recent history has shown us that Sega does not wish to have their source material twisted too far from its status quo. Its why BRB was banned from making Sonic wear pants. Its why the comics have mandates in the first place. They have a solid track record as of late of stepping in and protecting their IP.

 

And suspension of disbeleif works on may levels. Sonic doesn't have to look like he belongs in our environment in order for it to work. In fact, what he is and what he can do can be acceptable because he doesn't look like he belongs, if its presented correctly.

 

 

 

If the writing is clever and the animation is solid, then there would be no reason to laugh it out of theaters. There are much worse things they could do to Sonic than present him looking as their VG counterparts.

If anything, movies like Bay's TMNT that go too far to try and conform face more scrutiny for their redesigns than anything else. I can't imagine anyone, fans or general audience looking at those turtles and somehow feel like they enhance the movie going experience.

 

 

There was enough on the table to impress the Paramount exec who brought the rights to the movie and brought it onboard under his umbrella. Anything and everything he saw had to come from Marza in collaboration with Sony pictures. There had to be some work done already, maybe some pre-alpha stuff, but whatever it was, you can bet it would have had Marza's fingerprints all over it.

And any reason you can give my for Blur making more sense doing the animation can be countered. Sure Blur has a clear connection to the directing cast, but Marza is a Sega subsidiary. The guys who own the IP. Blur may have experience working with big movies, but they cant measure up to Marza who've had a decade+ of experience animating for Sonic himself.

Blur is a large enough studio insomuch that it wouldn't exactly need "help" producing a hybrid live action CG movie. What that tells me is, that the only reason Marza is here is because they understand the IP and as such I am willing to bet that their consistent vision of how Sonic should look and move will be carried over into the movie.

I'm not sure If that's going to work. I'm on Mobile because I'm using an android.

And yet SATAM is still considered one of the best Sonic tv shows of all time. If anything, this movie should take a few pages out of that awesome show. It WAS still Sonic but with REAL storytelling. If anything - it proves that the Brand doesn't fail when it strives to be more than subpar entertainment for 9 year old kids. Just like that show and the classic games - the main theme of this movie should be Nature. Vs Technology

 

Sega Is dealing with unprecedented territory here. This nothing like the Big Red Button fiasco. Paramount has the official rights to the movie franchise - that means that NO other studio can make movies for the character besides them. Even Sega can not make Sonic films on their own because they sold the license to Paramount. (See Marvel Studios and the curious case of Fox making their own Marvel films) That means that Sega will not be the only ones who have a say on certain elements in the film, Paramount are the ones footing the bill for the movie. If Sega wants Sonic to look like he belongs in a cartoon show in a PG-13 film then certain Paramount execs, Fowler, Tim Miller and Studio producers can veto that decision. Sega probably gets final say but it's going to be a collaborative process with input from both sides. Otherwise it's going to become a tug of war like what happened between Lionsgate/Dean Israelite and Saban on the Power Rangers movie. The former wanted a darker movie with much more alien Ranger designs and the latter (the IP owner) wanted a much lighter film with more heroic designs. This power struggle shows in early concept art for the movie. But ultimately they came to a middle ground.. And since we know that Sony were the last ones to hold the license, you can almost guarantee they had a say in Sonic's design. Amy Pascal, Tom Rothman and Avi Arad are known throughout the industry to be meddlers who meddle with movie productions.

 

Yes, I'd agree with you if this was a PG comedy film about Sonic & friends being "sucked out of the games" and dragged into the real world. There is a precedent for those types of movies (Space Jam, Looney Tunes, Roger Rabbit, Smurfs) But here's the thing, we got confirmation YEARS AGO that this movie would be nothing like those films. Doing a more straight forward PG-13 action film completely forfeits a whole new set of rules, it drastically changes the audience's perception of what constitutes for a suspension of disbelief. And rightfully so, because with that rating comes a certain expectation that a movie is going to deal with more adult themes, action and violence you would not see in a G-Rated kids flick. The only way it would not be laughed at by most people is if this movie is an adult comedy satire about Sonic being from video games; like it goes out of its way to point out the absurdity of a cartoon existing in real life. Like a PG-13 version of Roger Rabbit. Otherwise - trying to tell a story with any semblance of seriousness with cartoon characters will become the next big meme of 2019. I can just picture it now - the trailer trying to make Sonic who looks like he belongs in the Mickey mouse Christmas special,  look badass or do something really onlu to be met with laughter from the audience. It's very easy to imagine how wrong the movie can go if the movie looks like that Progressive commercial from 7 years ago and it tries to sell itself as a badass, edgy action film.

 

Those Turtle designs did sell the GA on the movie because the first movie was a box-office smash. Fans were the ones up in arms about the changes. Contrary, doing a TMNT film where the Turtles look like cartoons- exactly as they did in the Fred Wolf show would have turned off anybody who wasn't a hardcore fan.

 

The only argument that can be countered for Marza is whether Sonic will look like a cartoon model or a more realistic interpretation of that design. And it's based on the assumption that Marza made Sonic look like he doesn't fit in a real world environment in their proof if concept tests. Blur is the one who should be handling the bulk of animation. Sega may want Marza but Fowler may want Blur who ironically has experience with Sonic in the past.

[Shadowlax]

1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

I'm not sure If that's going to work. I'm on Mobile because I'm using an android.

And yet SATAM is still considered one of the best Sonic tv shows of all time. If anything, this movie should take a few pages out of that awesome show. It WAS still Sonic but with REAL storytelling. If anything - it proves that the Brand doesn't fail when it strives to be more than subpar entertainment for 9 year old kids. Just like that show and the classic games - the main theme of this movie should be Nature. Vs Technology

 

Depends on who you talk to

Bunch of people who think that shows wack

There are bunch of younger folks like sonic x better

There are a bunch of even younger folks and some old folks who like sonic boom and don't even want sonic to remotely take itself seriously

Same with these new shorts

[Sega DogTagz]

1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

I'm not sure If that's going to work. I'm on Mobile because I'm using an android.

Well then I'm not the person to ask, Sorry ^^

 

1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

And yet SATAM is still considered one of the best Sonic tv shows of all time. If anything, this movie should take a few pages out of that awesome show. It WAS still Sonic but with REAL storytelling. If anything - it proves that the Brand doesn't fail when it strives to be more than subpar entertainment for 9 year old kids. Just like that show and the classic games - the main theme of this movie should be Nature. Vs Technology

 

The quality of the end result is mute. Anything can be good with proper execution and anything can be trash if the people behind it F everything up. Thats why I used the Sonic cartoons as an example. Using the same basic idea of Sonic (Blue Hedgehog, snarky, run fast, fight Eggman), you can end up with two totally different cartoons on both sides of the spectrum. For every SATAM, you can just as easily end up with an Underground.

You said any iteration that carries those basic principles would still be "Sonic". My point in bringing up the cartoons was that if you generalize what Sonic is down to that basic concept, the possibilities for what you, or some movie dev can develop within those guidelines is incredibly diverse. If those are the only rules to play by, then you can warp and twist "Sonic" into something it really isn't, which is exactly why Sega has been so overprotective of the IP as of late.

 

For the record, I also adored SATAM.

 

1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

Sega Is dealing with unprecedented territory here. This nothing like the Big Red Button fiasco. Paramount has the official rights to the movie franchise - that means that NO other studio can make movies for the character besides them. Even Sega can not make Sonic films on their own because they sold the license to Paramount. (See Marvel Studios and the curious case of Fox making their own Marvel films) That means that Sega will not be the only ones who have a say on certain elements in the film, Paramount are the ones footing the bill for the movie. If Sega wants Sonic to look like he belongs in a cartoon show in a PG-13 film then certain Paramount execs, Fowler, Tim Miller and Studio producers can veto that decision. Sega probably gets final say but it's going to be a collaborative process with input from both sides. Otherwise it's going to become a tug of war like what happened between Lionsgate/Dean Israelite and Saban on the Power Rangers movie. The former wanted a darker movie with much more alien Ranger designs and the latter (the IP owner) wanted a much lighter film with more heroic designs. This power struggle shows in early concept art for the movie. But ultimately they came to a middle ground.. And since we know that Sony were the last ones to hold the license, you can almost guarantee they had a say in Sonic's design. Amy Pascal, Tom Rothman and Avi Arad are known throughout the industry to be meddlers who meddle with movie productions.

 

If Sega has the final say, then that's all there is too it. They may bend and twist, but they are not going to break. They are not going to compromise their vision of the IP. They don't do it in video games, they don't do it for cartoons and they wont do it for a movie.  If they have final authority, which they likely do, then they don't have to meet anyone at any middle ground. They are free to set the ground-rules and watch paramount work around their wishes.

Furthermore, Sega likes brand synergy. Having recently fractured the brand with all that Boom stuff, and the new-ish commitment to the classic branch, do you honestly think they are keen to introduce yet another Sonic to the marketplace? I doubt it.

Sonic Generations 2 is gonna be a night of 1000 sonics

 

1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

Yes, I'd agree with you if this was a PG comedy film about Sonic & friends being "sucked out of the games" and dragged into the real world. There is a precedent for those types of movies (Space Jam, Looney Tunes, Roger Rabbit, Smurfs) But here's the thing, we got confirmation YEARS AGO that this movie would be nothing like those films. Doing a more straight forward PG-13 action film completely forfeits a whole new set of rules, it drastically changes the audience's perception of what constitutes for a suspension of disbelief. And rightfully so, because with that rating comes a certain expectation that a movie is going to deal with more adult themes, action and violence you would not see in a G-Rated kids flick. The only way it would not be laughed at by most people is if this movie is an adult comedy satire about Sonic being from video games; like it goes out of its way to point out the absurdity of a cartoon existing in real life. Like a PG-13 version of Roger Rabbit. Otherwise - trying to tell a story with any semblance of seriousness with cartoon characters will become the next big meme of 2019. I can just picture it now - the trailer trying to make Sonic who looks like he belongs in the Mickey mouse Christmas special,  look badass or do something really onlu to be met with laughter from the audience. It's very easy to imagine how wrong the movie can go if the movie looks like that Progressive commercial from 7 years ago and it tries to sell itself as a badass, edgy action film.

And I would argue that all of that would either be justified or missed in how it is presented. If the movie sold itself by trying to sell edgy themes and high drama, then it'll probably fall on its face. But if the tension is built organically, and the stakes are raised as a result of Sonic's time-tested conflict with Eggman, and not some emotional baggage brought on board by the acting talent, then there really isn't any reason why it would matter what Sonic looks like in order to present that story.

The better the writing, the better the plot, the more people will be engaged and willing to accept what they are seeing. As the end of the day, the guys on screen will be talking to an anthropomorphic Hedgehog. I don't think giving him extra fur and details really changes that too much. Its going to face the same hurdling in selling its plot.

 

1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

Those Turtle designs did sell the GA on the movie because the first movie was a box-office smash. Fans were the ones up in arms about the changes. Contrary, doing a TMNT film where the Turtles look like cartoons- exactly as they did in the Fred Wolf show would have turned off anybody who wasn't a hardcore fan.

 

Your kidding yourself if your not willing to admit the designs of the turtles were not a point of contention. The near universal first reaction to anyone seeing them is "ew" while for fans is a combination of vomiting and internal screaming.

While even that didn't stop the movie from making money, it doesn't mean they should go back to that mistake well.

 

1 hour ago, PeterPancake said:

The only argument that can be countered for Marza is whether Sonic will look like a cartoon model or a more realistic interpretation of that design. And it's based on the assumption that Marza made Sonic look like he doesn't fit in a real world environment in their proof if concept tests. Blur is the one who should be handling the bulk of animation. Sega may want Marza but Fowler may want Blur who ironically has experience with Sonic in the past.

 

Whatever exp Blur has with Sonic will pale in comparison to Marza, so I woudn't exactly tout that as a mark on their belts.

And my assumption is based on the idea that Marza would continue to animate Sonic in the same way they have since 2003. It would be more of an assumption to say that they would suddenly feel the need to change all of a sudden.

[Blueknight V2.0]

18 minutes ago, Sega DogTagz said:

And my assumption is based on the idea that Marza would continue to animate Sonic in the same way they have since 2003. It would be more of an assumption to say that they would suddenly feel the need to change all of a sudden.

Marza didn't work on Sonic in 2003, they weren't involved until Sonic 2006 with assistance from Blur who did the CG in Shadow the Hedgehog the previous year. 2003 was when Sonic Heroes released and I have no idea who did the CG in that game. One things for certain is that the voice cast has greatly improved since then, which I hope the current voice cast returns to do the movie. Of course chances of that happening in this film is unlikely, that's one of the things the Ratchet & Clank movie got right was the voices, that aloone probably would've took it from good to worse. Now the voice acting is best in Boom and Forces, so replacing the voice cast once it got this good at matching the characters, would be a big mistake.

[PeterPancake]

1 hour ago, Sega DogTagz said:

 

You said any iteration that carries those basic principles would still be "Sonic". My point in bringing up the cartoons was that if you generalize what Sonic is down to that basic concept, the possibilities for what you, or some movie dev can develop within those guidelines is incredibly diverse. If those are the only rules to play by, then you can warp and twist "Sonic" into something it really isn't, which is exactly why Sega has been so overprotective of the IP as of late.

I won't dispute this argument. But I was just highlighting the fact that if they were going to do that it wouldn't be 'Sonic in name only". But yeah, I do agree that Sonic could be transformed into something completely unrecognizable using the core basics. But "updating" Sonic's design for a PG-13 live action film is a necessity and nowhere near as extreme. Otherwise, this movie could have just as easily been an animated movie aimed at nine y/o kids. 

And I loved SATAM too and even Sonic Underground despite the reception. And Wasn't a huge fan of The Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog but it was a fun little show. Sonic X & SATAM were my favorites and I hope if the movie takes any inspiration from the cartoons - They look at those two. 

Quote

If Sega has the final say, then that's all there is too it. They may bend and twist, but they are not going to break. They are not going to compromise their vision of the IP. They don't do it in video games, they don't do it for cartoons and they wont do it for a movie.  If they have final authority, which they likely do, then they don't have to meet anyone at any middle ground. They are free to set the ground-rules and watch paramount work around their wishes.

Furthermore, Sega likes brand synergy. Having recently fractured the brand with all that Boom stuff, and the new-ish commitment to the classic branch, do you honestly think they are keen to introduce yet another Sonic to the marketplace? I doubt it.

Paramount has been making movies for almost 80 years. They will have a much better grasp of what sells to the audience and Sega must realize this. Something as important as Sonic's design aka what will be the FACE of their product and possibly franchise will need to and most probably will  be a collaborative proccess between everyone involved. It won't just be "We want the game model ripped out of Sonic Colors and that's FINAL" it does not work like that. That's not how moviemaking works. Jeff Fowler will have a say, Neal Moretz will have a say, Tim Miller will have a say, concept artists for the movie who they send patents out to will have some pull as well if Paramount likes what  they're selling. Making a movie is a collaborative proccess. It isn't just going to entail Sega execs stomping their feet in the storyboard rooms and gatekeeping every creative decision the writers and producers make. 

 

And yes, by the very nature of the movie, regardless - It will be a new Sonic on the market. Merchandise and tv ads will be a separate brand from the games.

 

I'll reply to the rest in 40 minutes. I'm about to get off of work