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

[PeterPancake]

Lmao what were you all expecting? They want to tell a REAL story. This sounds completely different from what I was expecting but most importantly, it sounds GOOD. 

[Red Hot Jack]

Besides the small town, it sounds exactly what I thought it would be, which is Sonic X without Chris but with cops.

[Biggs]

I don't know why people are slamming this "juvenile delinquent" angle so soon. Sonic's always been an anti-authority figure and had brush-ups with police and military officials in the past (SA2, Heroes, Sonic X, Forces, the comics, cartoons etc.) . Rebelliousness against authority is a key trait in all of Sonic's games, even in the classics, and Sonic is always portrayed as a freedom fighter. It actually fits quite well with Sonic's personality, or it least it's fairly logical. That's not to say it won't be complete shit in the end, but I for one am actually a bit relieved because at least they're aiming for something *slightly* original instead of sticking too close to the source material. It does have humans in it, so somethings will be changed.

I think this should be cut some slack, particularly when we haven't even seen a trailer yet and it's just one aspect of the film.

[Multikaris]

14 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

Coming of age 101. Sonic starts the story as an inexperienced, immature hero and he has to rise up and stop Eggman because he's only one who can. He will learn the meaning of responsibility. And with Great Power Co- you get the idea.

 

Eggman can be used as an instrument for Sonic's character arc 

Or they use say Jet instead, to complete the Homecoming comparison.

[NikoS]

Paramount please, i'm trying to be optimistic for this movie, but you guys are not helping.

[PeterPancake]

6 minutes ago, Biggs said:

I don't know why people are slamming this "juvenile delinquent" angle so soon. Sonic's always been an anti-authority figure and had brush-ups with police and military officials in the past (SA2, Heroes, Sonic X, Forces, the comics, cartoons etc.) . Rebelliousness against authority is a key trait in all of Sonic's games, even in the classics, and Sonic is always portrayed as a freedom fighter. It actually fits quite well with Sonic's personality, or it least it's fairly logical. That's not to say it won't be complete shit in the end, but I for one am actually a bit relieved because at least they're aiming for something *slightly* original instead of sticking too close to the source material. It does have humans in it, so somethings will be changed.

I think this should be cut some slack, particularly when we haven't even seen a trailer yet and it's just one aspect of the film.

EXACTLY. Sonic's ALWAYS been this way. I feel like the Craig-Smith version has made people forget what Sonic use to be like. He was always a rebel with attitude who wanted to have fun. Post 2010-Sonic has dialed it back a bit but go back to any Sonic games before Colors and you'll see what he is describing is perfectly in line with the character.

[Nicky Nicardo]

I gotta say... now I'm far more interested and excited to see this movie.

I was already gonna see it no matter what, but still. I... kinda like what I'm hearing so far.

[Red Hot Jack]

So this means Sonic is gonna play "bad cop" in the duo XD

But seriously, did people expect no humans bar Eggman? In this kind of movie?

[CaptainRobo]

You know, about the picture of the logo that was revealed back in April. I think the background of the logo kinda teased where it will be setting in. The Paramount Pictures CEO mentioned rural environment.:

He’s a juvenile delinquent on the adventures in a pretty straight rural environment with a local policeman.

I wonder if the town will be called Station Square, just like Angel Grove was an town in the Power Rangers movie.

[PeterPancake]

 

4 minutes ago, CaptainRobo said:

You know, about the picture of the logo that was revealed back in April. I think the background of the logo kinda teased where it will be setting in. The Paramount Pictures CEO mentioned rural environment.:

He’s a juvenile delinquent on the adventures in a pretty straight rural environment with a local policeman.

I wonder if the town will be called Station Square, just like Angel Grove was an town in the Power Rangers movie.

Good catch. I just wonder how Tails and Amy are going to fit this narrative

[The Deleter]

I expected Humans. I expected them to be at least half the focus. (Hoped otherwise though) I even expected the "He's from another world!" shtick to be played out for Sonic and anyone else.

I just didn't expect his role in the world and story to be completely different this time around. Especially with SEGA overseeing this, with how controlling they are of stuff like this.

And it is a better hook than "Sonic fights live action Eggman"... but that doesn't mean it's a particularly good hook, especially for a series as established as this. Rise of Lyric had a better premise for an origin story imo, despite how botched it was. "Sonic is an ass but over time he learns to be a good friend as they save the world." You could dive waaaay deeper into an idea like that, set up tons of beats for an engaging story, without throwing everything Sonic as a series is about to the wayside like this seems to be, straight down to the main character himself.

[PeterPancake]

2 minutes ago, The Deleter said:

I expected Humans. I expected them to be at least half the focus. (Hoped otherwise though) I even expected the "He's from another world!" shtick to be played out for Sonic and anyone else.

I just didn't expect his role in the world and story to be completely different this time around. Especially with SEGA overseeing this, with how controlling they are of stuff like this.

And it is a better hook than "Sonic fights live action Eggman"... but that doesn't mean it's a particularly good hook, especially for a series as established as this. Rise of Lyric had a better premise for an origin story imo, despite how botched it was. "Sonic is an ass but over time he learns to be a good friend as they save the world." You could dive waaaay deeper into an idea like that, set up tons of beats for an engaging story, without throwing everything Sonic as a series is about to the wayside like this seems to be, straight down to the main character himself.

How exactly is it "throwing it all away" (wink)? I don't understand. What you described is what we're getting 

[The Deleter]

9 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

 

Good catch. I just wonder how Tails and Amy are going to fit this narrative

Simple: they are not

Like it was a probability when this movie could have been about Sonic fighting in the city against Eggman or any monster of the day like Adventure was about, but with this new angle I'd say it's a downright certainty

[Ryannumber1gamer]

14 minutes ago, Biggs said:

I don't know why people are slamming this "juvenile delinquent" angle so soon. Sonic's always been an anti-authority figure and had brush-ups with police and military officials in the past (SA2, Heroes, Sonic X, Forces, the comics, cartoons etc.) . Rebelliousness against authority is a key trait in all of Sonic's games, even in the classics, and Sonic is always portrayed as a freedom fighter. It actually fits quite well with Sonic's personality, or it least it's fairly logical. That's not to say it won't be complete shit in the end, but I for one am actually a bit relieved because at least they're aiming for something *slightly* original instead of sticking too close to the source material. It does have humans in it, so somethings will be changed.

I think this should be cut some slack, particularly when we haven't even seen a trailer yet and it's just one aspect of the film.

Because there's different ways to take the meaning of what was said in the interview, and from that, you can gleam a lot of the possibilities of the movie from it. Namely:

Quote

“He’s a juvenile delinquent on the adventures in a pretty straight rural environment with a local policeman. It was instantly engaging and it was good enough where you could see where it’s going,”

Quote

“What we’re trying to do with Sonic is make a movie about a small-town police officer and Sonic at a time when they are both desperately in need of a friend, and we hope that this theme is friendship is what gives the film its heart and makes it prosper.”

This doesn't imply Sonic being his usual rebellious character against the likes of G.U.N or the police in X for example. In most examples where it's brought up, it's also established Sonic isn't being purely malicious or whatever in his actions against said forces. He has his own philosophy in life and his own way of living life itself. He's against Freedom being stepped on by others, or in general, corrupt officials in it for their own gain.

Take Adventure 2 for example, it's extremely easy to see Sonic's turning against G.U.N as being an entire plot on their part. Not only because they were fully aware of Shadow because Rouge was sent to spy on Eggman and Shadow himself, but they still keep chasing him, which implies that their whole "misunderstanding" is actually a cover story for Shadow's escape by pinning it on Sonic as opposed to the evil super-weapon/lifeform they kept locked in their base for years trying to find a way to use it themselves. 

Heroes doesn't have much if I remember correctly, that's going straight after Metal/Eggman. X doesn't count because they only tried to capture him for the first few episodes, when they didn't know what the hell Sonic was, and Eggman was also terrorizing the place with his robots. In later episodes, they become celebrities and we see a perfect example of Sonic's character when he runs away from G.U.N trying to capture and bring him to a party when the mayor is trying to use it to get publicity with their latest "heroes". 

Comics absolutely doesn't count either because 90% of the time, Eggman was in rule of the world and had literally roboticised everyone but Sonic and co. Of course he's rebelling against that. 

The point is there's a huge line and difference between being rebellious and free-spirited, and being an out and out delinquent who is supposedly making as much trouble for the police before Eggman pulls whatever scheme. Every other instance had a shade of gray element that showed Sonic had his reasons for being the way he was and rebelling. That he was standing up for oppression, or his own way of life, especially when it meant keeping promises to his friends instead of being a tool in some jackass' attempt for publicity, or y'know, when a corrupt army is trying to pin crimes on you. 

Add in the fact that Sonic "supposedly is desperately longing for a friend", and it becomes absolutely worse, because it then implies Sonic's acting out due to being lonely/misunderstood/bored/whatever else, and it makes him look more like a jerk who needs to be taught to become a hero as opposed to Sonic being a legitimately good guy with a sense of an attitude and a free-spirited nature. Sonic shouldn't need "Tom the Cop" to befriend him and teach him what he's doing is wrong. He shouldn't need to have someone on the opposite side of the law there to tell him about right and wrong and convince him to help the police. That should literally be apart of Sonic's moral code because he's all about fighting for what's right and fighting against oppression like Eggman's.

But then there's also general things you can grab out of it. Sonic is seemingly pals with Tom the Cop before Tails. Sonic is going to lose his agency as a character and his usual rebellious and free-spirited attitude because he literally has to be taught by new human character - Tom about doing what's right, about what he's doing is wrong, about stopping Eggman, and about this that and other.

Put it this way, what if Batman wasn't a crimefighter who dedicated his life to training, and homing his mind and body to ensure that never again would a small child be forced to watch their parents be gunned down. What if instead he was a complete and total psychopath that hunted down and murdered criminals until suddenly Bob the Coffee Maker appeared and helped him when he was down, teaching him that everything he was doing was wrong, and then helping him progress to something resembling the character who actually know and enjoy? On top of that, Alfred is also removed so we can justify the new character. 

Context is absolutely everything. And if a "coming of age" story like this is possibly going to end up just ruining the character and turning it into the opposite of what he usually is to then justify new character's existence by making it so new character teaches him to be who he's actually meant to be, like that just not only badly character assassinates Sonic, but also removes his own agency by making it someone else's actions and lessons that make him who he is in the first place.

Better yet - a proven example. There was an episode of the Simpsons in Season 9 called The Principal and the Pauper that is still mocked to this day because of it being a gimmicky character assassination. In an attempt to justify a brand new character - they rewrote Principal Skinner's entire life. Instead of being an uptight mother's boy who fought in the Vietnam War and being a commentary on what strict totalitarian parenting can do, they changed it so Skinner was a fake - a street-punk from Capital City who enlisted in the war and fought alongside the real Seymour Skinner who helped him straighten his life out. Then he took his identity when the real Skinner was believed dead. The real Skinner returns and the fake one is forced to go back to his life as a street-punk til everyone reveals they dislike the real Skinner and bring back the fake one, ruining a character and his upbringing in order to justify a lazy gimmick episode which is still mocked by Simpsons fans and is even hated by Matt Groaning to this day IIRC.   

And sure, I could be wrong, but there's as much evidence from what we've now been told with the new story synopsis to back these concepts.

You can argue all day about "Maybe the cops are on Sonic for no reason/misguided reasons" but then you realize one thing, they wouldn't be calling him a "juvenile delinquent" if he was actually someone who didn't do much wrong and just ended up in a misguided scuffle with the law enforcement. The fact they specifically feel the need to call Sonic that implies that he is indeed doing wrong things and Tom has to straighten his life out. That is nowhere near comparable to every other time Sonic was "rebellious" against authority in this series. Not to mention if you notice, Sonic isn't usually just rebellious to any authority, he's rebellious against those who wrongfully abuse it. G.U.N tried to frame him for a crime he didn't commit, so he went against them. Eggman turned the entire population into his mindless slaves and he rebelled against it. The mayor of Station Square tried to use him as a publicity tool at the cost of one of Sonic's friends' dream, he rebelled against it. You'll find there being little time Sonic actually rebels without having a sound reasoning for doing so.

[Razule]

Not wild about the premise either, but even Spider-Man was called a menace despite being a pretty straight-up hero back when J. Jonah Jameson was a thing. It doesn't necessarily mean he's a criminal. Just that he isn't trusted for whatever reason. Maybe he's just too cool for school, or reckless, or a mutant animal from Mars, or all of the above.

[The Deleter]

6 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

How exactly is it "throwing it all away" (wink)? I don't understand. What you described is what we're getting 

Read everything Ryan said above; he hit the nail dead on the head when it comes to what angle this movie is going for.

From everything we know so far, this is where the hook comes from, where the relationship between Tom and Sonic is going to be built around, while simultaneously throwing everything about the character away outside his "rebellious" nature. It's an "attitude", yes, but it's completely misapplied, and he'll be a completely different character in every other way as a result. And the worst part is, that's the only way this narrative hook has any merit to it; if Sonic ends up being better handled than what we're expecting and closer to his actual role in the games, the relationship between him and Tom will only be weaker and more arbitrary as a result.

In order for the movie to be it's best, Sonic has to be at his worst. That's probably the worst trade-off I could possibly think of.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

2 minutes ago, Razule said:

Not wild about the premise either, but even Spider-Man was called a menace despite being a pretty straight-up hero back when J. Jonah Jameson was a thing. It doesn't necessarily mean he's a criminal.

Yeah, but that was never used a defining character explanation of Spider-Man, that was legitimately what J. Jonah Jameson called Spidey and was a key central plot point of the movies themselves - that Spidey wasn't being hated due to Jonah's slander, right down to Aunt May warning Peter to stay away from him. The entire point of that in the Spidey series is Jonah attempting Character Assassination on Spidey by blaming him for everything.

You never see a description of any Spidey movie directly calling Spider-Man a menace as a descriptive piece for his actual character.

[Salamander]

51 minutes ago, Biggs said:

I don't know why people are slamming this "juvenile delinquent" angle so soon. Sonic's always been an anti-authority figure and had brush-ups with police and military officials in the past (SA2, Heroes, Sonic X, Forces, the comics, cartoons etc.) . Rebelliousness against authority is a key trait in all of Sonic's games, even in the classics, and Sonic is always portrayed as a freedom fighter. It actually fits quite well with Sonic's personality, or it least it's fairly logical. That's not to say it won't be complete shit in the end, but I for one am actually a bit relieved because at least they're aiming for something *slightly* original instead of sticking too close to the source material. It does have humans in it, so somethings will be changed.

I think this should be cut some slack, particularly when we haven't even seen a trailer yet and it's just one aspect of the film.

Oh, I don't have a problem with the juvenile delinquent angle.  That actually fits a kind of unified vision of Sonic pretty well, and your analysis of the decision is spot-on.

No, it's all the rest of it that has absolutely nothing to do with Sonic.

[A sonic fan]

Looks like no tails in this movie then. 

[Multikaris]

8 minutes ago, A sonic fan said:

Looks like no tails in this movie then. 

We could still at least get more characters in the post-credits scene. 

[Diogenes]

2 minutes ago, The Deleter said:

Rise of Lyric had a better premise for an origin story imo, despite how botched it was. "Sonic is an ass but over time he learns to be a good friend as they save the world."

Isn't that basically what they're going for, though? By the sound of it, at least.

I mean my expectations are still set at "dumpster fire" because that's every video game movie adaptation and many Sonic things, but I don't actually hate the sound of this. Looking it at it from the perspective of, "how do we make a viable standalone story out of this 'Sonic the Hedgehog' thing?" rather than "how best do we make a 90 minute JO session for the fans?", it sounds like a bit cliched but still viable angle to take. It's a sort of origin story; he's got all this youthful energy and rebelliousness and it comes out in less-than-constructive ways until something shakes him out of that narrow mindset, he gets a wider view of the world, and he learns to apply that energy in a more productive way.

It kinda feels like people were expecting Sonic to already be the Sonic we have now, but then...what's the story? You want a movie starring Sonic, you need a story about Sonic, and you can't really do that if he's already a morally perfect and beloved hero. There's gotta be something to challenge him and some direction for him to develop in, and they'd obviously want to develop him into the character that people already know and love, not away from it.

[Badnik Mechanic]

18 minutes ago, A sonic fan said:

Looks like no tails in this movie then. 

Sequel bait.

[PeterPancake]

To be fair, In the beginning- in the first game, there was only Sonic. But I'll be pretty disappointed if Tails is not in the movie. 

[DabigRG]

2 hours ago, CaptainRobo said:

 

Moritz continued, “What we’re trying to do with Sonic is make a movie about a small-town police officer and Sonic at a time when they are both desperately in need of a friend, and we hope that this theme is friendship is what gives the film its heart and makes it prosper.”

 

 

Lol, Sonic and his shitty friends.

1 hour ago, Biggs said:

I don't know why people are slamming this "juvenile delinquent" angle so soon. Sonic's always been an anti-authority figure and had brush-ups with police and military officials in the past (SA2, Heroes, Sonic X, Forces, the comics, cartoons etc.) . Rebelliousness against authority is a key trait in all of Sonic's games, even in the classics, and Sonic is always portrayed as a freedom fighter. It actually fits quite well with Sonic's personality, or it least it's fairly logical.

Yeah, I recall pointing out that Sonic is essentially an anti-hero a while back in loose reference to the unused Best of Cover .

1 hour ago, Miragnarok said:

Or they use say Jet instead, to complete the Homecoming comparison.

Lol, what?

[Biggs]

42 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Because there's different ways to take the meaning of what was said in the interview, and from that, you can gleam a lot of the possibilities of the movie from it. Namely:

This doesn't imply Sonic being his usual rebellious character against the likes of G.U.N or the police in X for example. In most examples where it's brought up, it's also established Sonic isn't being purely malicious or whatever in his actions against said forces. He has his own philosophy in life and his own way of living life itself. He's against Freedom being stepped on by others, or in general, corrupt officials in it for their own gain.

Take Adventure 2 for example, it's extremely easy to see Sonic's turning against G.U.N as being an entire plot on their part. Not only because they were fully aware of Shadow because Rouge was sent to spy on Eggman and Shadow himself, but they still keep chasing him, which implies that their whole "misunderstanding" is actually a cover story for Shadow's escape by pinning it on Sonic as opposed to the evil super-weapon/lifeform they kept locked in their base for years trying to find a way to use it themselves. 

Heroes doesn't have much if I remember correctly, that's going straight after Metal/Eggman. X doesn't count because they only tried to capture him for the first few episodes, when they didn't know what the hell Sonic was, and Eggman was also terrorizing the place with his robots. In later episodes, they become celebrities and we see a perfect example of Sonic's character when he runs away from G.U.N trying to capture and bring him to a party when the mayor is trying to use it to get publicity with their latest "heroes".  

Comics absolutely doesn't count either because 90% of the time, Eggman was in rule of the world and had literally roboticised everyone but Sonic and co. Of course he's rebelling against that.  

The point is there's a huge line and difference between being rebellious and free-spirited, and being an out and out delinquent who is supposedly making as much trouble for the police before Eggman pulls whatever scheme. Every other instance had a shade of gray element that showed Sonic had his reasons for being the way he was and rebelling. That he was standing up for oppression, or his own way of life, especially when it meant keeping promises to his friends instead of being a tool in some jackass' attempt for publicity, or y'know, when a corrupt army is trying to pin crimes on you. 

Add in the fact that Sonic "supposedly is desperately longing for a friend", and it becomes absolutely worse, because it then implies Sonic's acting out due to being lonely/misunderstood/bored/whatever else, and it makes him look more like a jerk who needs to be taught to become a hero as opposed to Sonic being a legitimately good guy with a sense of an attitude and a free-spirited nature. Sonic shouldn't need "Tom the Cop" to befriend him and teach him what he's doing is wrong. He shouldn't need to have someone on the opposite side of the law there to tell him about right and wrong and convince him to help the police. That should literally be apart of Sonic's moral code because he's all about fighting for what's right and fighting against oppression like Eggman's.

But then there's also general things you can grab out of it. Sonic is seemingly pals with Tom the Cop before Tails. Sonic is going to lose his agency as a character and his usual rebellious and free-spirited attitude because he literally has to be taught by new human character - Tom about doing what's right, about what he's doing is wrong, about stopping Eggman, and about this that and other.

Put it this way, what if Batman wasn't a crimefighter who dedicated his life to training, and homing his mind and body to ensure that never again would a small child be forced to watch their parents be gunned down. What if instead he was a complete and total psychopath that hunted down and murdered criminals until suddenly Bob the Coffee Maker appeared and helped him when he was down, teaching him that everything he was doing was wrong, and then helping him progress to something resembling the character who actually know and enjoy? On top of that, Alfred is also removed so we can justify the new character. 

Context is absolutely everything. And if a "coming of age" story like this is possibly going to end up just ruining the character and turning it into the opposite of what he usually is to then justify new character's existence by making it so new character teaches him to be who he's actually meant to be, like that just not only badly character assassinates Sonic, but also removes his own agency by making it someone else's actions and lessons that make him who he is in the first place.

Better yet - a proven example. There was an episode of the Simpsons in Season 9 called The Principal and the Pauper that is still mocked to this day because of it being a gimmicky character assassination. In an attempt to justify a brand new character - they rewrote Principal Skinner's entire life. Instead of being an uptight mother's boy who fought in the Vietnam War and being a commentary on what strict totalitarian parenting can do, they changed it so Skinner was a fake - a street-punk from Capital City who enlisted in the war and fought alongside the real Seymour Skinner who helped him straighten his life out. Then he took his identity when the real Skinner was believed dead. The real Skinner returns and the fake one is forced to go back to his life as a street-punk til everyone reveals they dislike the real Skinner and bring back the fake one, ruining a character and his upbringing in order to justify a lazy gimmick episode which is still mocked by Simpsons fans and is even hated by Matt Groaning to this day IIRC.   

And sure, I could be wrong, but there's as much evidence from what we've now been told with the new story synopsis to back these concepts.

You can argue all day about "Maybe the cops are on Sonic for no reason/misguided reasons" but then you realize one thing, they wouldn't be calling him a "juvenile delinquent" if he was actually someone who didn't do much wrong and just ended up in a misguided scuffle with the law enforcement. The fact they specifically feel the need to call Sonic that implies that he is indeed doing wrong things and Tom has to straighten his life out. That is nowhere near comparable to every other time Sonic was "rebellious" against authority in this series. Not to mention if you notice, Sonic isn't usually just rebellious to any authority, he's rebellious against those who wrongfully abuse it. G.U.N tried to frame him for a crime he didn't commit, so he went against them. Eggman turned the entire population into his mindless slaves and he rebelled against it. The mayor of Station Square tried to use him as a publicity tool at the cost of one of Sonic's friends' dream, he rebelled against it. You'll find there being little time Sonic actually rebels without having a sound reasoning for doing so.

Why isn't this comparable to Sonic X/SA2 etc.? If your line of argument is that in those cited examples Sonic is only rebellious against bad authority, then we need to know more about the police in this film, and whether they are simply benevolent police officers doing their job or have it out for Sonic and abuse their power which is a common theme in any police-centered drama. But we don't so some judgement should be reserved.

The definition of "delinquent" is a young person who commits minor crime. He's not going to be a drug dealer or a football hooligan. I doubt he'll be a shoplifter. Him doing consistently wrong things due to a broken moral compass doesn't wash. At most Sonic might be considered disruptive due to his speed and cocky nature - resulting in small property damage or things like that. This is qualified even more if the police aren't totally benevolent and Sonic is clearly in the right. But again, we don't know yet. There are so many things that these short comments omitted and yet so many assumptions are being made about where this movie is headed.

Regardless of who is right here - if Sonic is a total asshole - how doesn't that loosely fit in with his drive to rebel? It's an instinct that he's not using against bad people in the beginning of the film - but he obviously will be in the end of the film. It's a logical idea. It's not one to one with the source material, very clearly, but this is also a separate universe with humans in it. It makes sense as a re-contextualization of his character here. And as such I don't see it as a negative whatsoever. In fact I don't feel positive about it much either. There's nothing much to gleam here, any themes or character changes you're thinking of could be shot down by the time a trailer comes out. Same with mine.

Quote

And sure, I could be wrong, but there's as much evidence from what we've now been told with the new story synopsis to back these concepts.

There hardly any evidence. This isn't a synopsis.

This is my point. It could be shite. And given the history of video-game movies, it's likely. But we don't know a thing.