Jump to content
Badnik Mechanic

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

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

They aren't superficial. There specific design elements taken from the traditional design (quills, muzzle) that are unique to Sonic's design. It's not like they took some Olympic athlete and poured blue paint on his body. It's the traditional design translated filtered through the vision of filmmakers that want him to look like a believable creature. I fail to see how there's anything bootleg about it. Going by that logic, any adaption that changes or enhances an original design for the new medium is a "bootleg" version of the design because it's not the original plastered on the screen (which is what many seem to want)

Yeah but this look for sonic is not an enhancement.

I mean the 1989 Batman outfit was a enhancement:

 

Heck even the man of steel superman suit is a enhancement:

 

But you are calling something like this:

A "enhancement" Over this:

HowardTheDuck-1.jpg

 

Nope not a enhancement.... at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PeterPancake said:

They aren't superficial. There specific design elements taken from the traditional design (quills, muzzle) that are unique to Sonic's design. It's not like they took some Olympic athlete and poured blue paint on his body.

I mean, have you seen his legs...?

Okay but in all seriousness, yes, those things are superficial. Quills and muzzles are things that literally every hedgehog has, fictional or not, and colouration is so difficult to fuck up that I don't think anyone really has done so yet  - the worst anyone has managed to do so far is a different shade of blue or peach. It makes no sense to point to these things as definitive points of comparison because they aren't intricate similarities, they're literally obligatory parts of the character that you basically have to miss on purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MadmanRB said:

Yeah but this look for sonic is not an enhancement.

I mean the 1989 Batman outfit was a enhancement:

 

Heck even the man of steel superman suit is a enhancement:

 

But you are calling something like this:

Over this:

HowardTheDuck-1.jpg

They aren't any different from what Sonic did. Batman is not wearing grey spandex stretched over his body. He's wearing black body armor. Superman isn't wearing trunks a baby blue spandex. He's in a suit that's believably alien. Based more on the New 52 look. 

Share this post


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

They aren't superficial. There specific design elements taken from the traditional design (quills, muzzle) that are unique to Sonic's design. It's not like they took some Olympic athlete and poured blue paint on his body. It's the traditional design translated filtered through the vision of filmmakers that want him to look like a believable creature. I fail to see how there's anything bootleg about it. Going by that logic, any adaption that changes or enhances an original design for the new medium is a "bootleg" version of the design because it's not the original plastered on the screen (which is what many seem to want)

That's exactly the fucking problem right there. Sonic is a 3 foot tall, bipedal hedgehog that runs fast. There's no way to make that concept a believable thing in the real world, much less his design.

He looks no more believable now than he has in any of his games.

Share this post


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

They aren't any different from what Sonic did. Batman is not wearing grey spandex stretched over his body. He's wearing black body armor. Superman isn't wearing trunks a baby blue spandex. He's in a suit that's believably alien. Based more on the New 52 look. 

Wrong!

The two are not even in the same ballpark, they are not even playing the same sport!

Might as well call Ice Hockey Football/Soccer at this rate.

Heck call professional boxing golf too while we are at it.

Share this post


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

- Blue fur? Check

- 6 Quills? Check.

- Peach/Beige colored patch of fur on his torso? Check.

- Red shoes? Check.

- White hands? Check.

- Green eyes? Check.

- Peach/Beige muzzle? Check. 

I've mentioned it before and I'll have to mention it again since you posted this list, but these are the most superficial or surface level of details, they are not the fine details which is what most people are comparing it to. And before you fall back on your Captain America example again let me just ask you if in both the comics and the MCU if Captain America is a human male?

...

Alright, so with that out of the way let's move on to the important detail/question about Sonic that you are missing with your list of details. Is Movie Sonic and Game Sonic both anthropomorphic animals based on the design Style of Mickey Mouse and Felix the Cat?

...

As the answer is pretty obvious you now have the dissonance that creates the disdain for this design. While Captain America is a human male in comic and live action while Sonic is not an anthropomorphic animal in the design style of Mickey Mouse and Felix the Cat in both mediums and that is one of his defining details which is absent from your list. And just to stop the Rocket Racoon comparison, Rocket in less stylized comics is typically drawn as a racoon standing on it's hind legs with a bit of bipedalism added to his design. This is also true even in the more stylized takes on him and at no point is he ever presented as an anthropomorphic animal in the style of Mickey Mouse and Felix the Cat.

Now while you are right that the Mickey Mouse/Felix the Cat design style does not translate into a realistic live action design, the fact that it doesn't is what has lead to so much disdain about this design in the first place. Absolutely no one asked for a live action Sonic the Hedgehog movie. There was no demand for such and the decision was an artist decision based on live action selling better than animated to an older audience even though Incredibles 2 more than proves with it's billion dollar revenue that animated sells just fine to its target demographic, which is the same as the Sonic franchise's on a whole; kids.

Bottom line though is that you're comparison to comic characters like Captain America and Rocket don't work because they did not change a human male into something other than a human male and they did not change a bipedal racoon into anything other than a bipedal racoon. With Sonic however they took the structure that his details go onto, an anthropomorphic animal in the vein of Mickey Mouse and Felix the Cat, and got rid of it in favor of what most people are seeing as a human male. That is a powerful distinction and one that can't be ignored. The details being the same is nice and all, but you could put the ads in Times Square on your house and say it's effectively the same because it's the Times Square ads still. But doing so completely ignores the architecture under the details and that architecture is every bit as important as the details attached to it.

I apologize if my tone comes across as aggressive, but at the bare minimum I hope this helps you see the problem with your comparison; Sonic in the movie design has different architecture under his details unlike most of your examples and ignoring that in favor of the details only is cutting out half or more of the design and what makes it iconic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Blacklightning said:

I mean, have you seen his legs...?

Okay but in all seriousness, yes, those things are superficial. Quills and muzzles are things that literally every hedgehog has, fictional or not, and colouration is so difficult to fuck up that I don't think anyone really has done so yet  - the worst anyone has managed to do so far is a different shade of blue or peach. It makes no sense to point to these things as definitive points of comparison because they aren't intricate similarities, they're literally obligatory parts of the character that you basically have to miss on purpose.

No Hedgehog has 6 giant points on the back of it's head that vaguely look like quills. No Hedgehog has green eyes or red sneakers. No Hedgehog stands on two feet and runs around at the speed of sound. These are all traits SPECIFIC to Sonic that the filmmakers included in their design. The elements that are "superficial" will make or break the design bank ability and recognizablity of Sonic's design to the GA. The "issues" with the design are superficial. Defined thighs and limbs that don't look like noodles doesn't mean it looks nothing like Sonic. Separated eyes instead of a gumball/cyclops eye doesn't mean it looks nothing like Sonic. Blue arms doesn't mean it looks nothing like Sonic. Batman didn't wear grey until BvS. He was wearing black body armor in all of his film appearances. Hell, the Dark Knight suit looks like a literal jigsaw puzzle and nothing like a traditional Batsuit but does that mean he looks nothing like Batman? No. He still has the ears, the Cape and the bat symbol on his chest. He is still RECOGNIZABLE as Batman.

 

I am genuinely perplexed by how the difference between a Sonic that doesn't have noodles and one that does means he looks nothing like the latter. The design is as close as you can get to the game bar a few changes without looking like Roger Rabbit in live action blockbuster 

Share this post


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

.I am genuinely perplexed by how the difference between a Sonic that doesn't have noodles and one that does means he looks nothing like the latter. The design is as close as you can get to the game bar a few changes without looking like Roger Rabbit in live action blockbuster 

Newsflash, Roger Rabbit was a blockbuster, your point?

Share this post


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

No Hedgehog has 6 giant points on the back of it's head that vaguely look like quills. No Hedgehog has green eyes or red sneakers. No Hedgehog stands on two feet and runs around at the speed of sound. These are all traits SPECIFIC to Sonic that the filmmakers included in their design. The elements that are "superficial" will make or break the design bank ability and recognizablity of Sonic's design to the GA. The "issues" with the design are superficial. Defined thighs and limbs that don't look like noodles doesn't mean it looks nothing like Sonic. Separated eyes instead of a gumball/cyclops eye doesn't mean it looks nothing like Sonic. Blue arms doesn't mean it looks nothing like Sonic. Batman didn't wear grey until BvS. He was wearing black body armor in all of his film appearances. Hell, the Dark Knight suit looks like a literal jigsaw puzzle and nothing like a traditional Batsuit but does that mean he looks nothing like Batman? No. He still has the ears, the Cape and the bat symbol on his chest. He is still RECOGNIZABLE as Batman.

 

I am genuinely perplexed by how the difference between a Sonic that doesn't have noodles and one that does means he looks nothing like the latter. The design is as close as you can get to the game bar a few changes without looking like Roger Rabbit in live action blockbuster 

I probably should give you some time to read my post first but I'll answer again since you are still working on the same comparisons of details and not acknowledging the architecture underneath them.

Batman in ever single live action movie appearance like his main comic iteration is built on the architecture of a human male. Sonic in the movie is not built on the same architecture as his traditional design and that creates a completely different beast regardless of sharing the same details (bar arm color, his mono eye, his banana/ jellybean nose, his gloves, and his shoes). When you have to change the architecture of his design you are changing one of the fundamentals of it and what allows the details to come together in such an iconic and recognizable way. You can't just ignore that the architecture is different in Sonic's case.

Share this post


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

I am genuinely perplexed by how the difference between a Sonic that doesn't have noodles and one that does means he looks nothing like the latter. The design is as close as you can get to the game bar a few changes without looking like Roger Rabbit in live action blockbuster 

Well, maybe that's what it should've been to begin with? Maybe there's a reason live action adaptations almost always are a terrible idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sonic Fan J said:

I've mentioned it before and I'll have to mention it again since you posted this list, but these are the most superficial or surface level of details, they are not the fine details which is what most people are comparing it to. And before you fall back on your Captain America example again let me just ask you if in both the comics and the MCU if Captain America is a human male?

...

Alright, so with that out of the way let's move on to the important detail/question about Sonic that you are missing with your list of details. Is Movie Sonic and Game Sonic both anthropomorphic animals based on the design Style of Mickey Mouse and Felix the Cat?

...

As the answer is pretty obvious you now have the dissonance that creates the disdain for this design. While Captain America is a human male in comic and live action while Sonic is not an anthropomorphic animal in the design style of Mickey Mouse and Felix the Cat in both mediums and that is one of his defining details which is absent from your list. And just to stop the Rocket Racoon comparison, Rocket in less stylized comics is typically drawn as a racoon standing on it's hind legs with a bit of bipedalism added to his design. This is also true even in the more stylized takes on him and at no point is he ever presented as an anthropomorphic animal in the style of Mickey Mouse and Felix the Cat.

Now while you are right that the Mickey Mouse/Felix the Cat design style does not translate into a realistic live action design, the fact that it doesn't is what has lead to so much disdain about this design in the first place. Absolutely no one asked for a live action Sonic the Hedgehog movie. There was no demand for such and the decision was an artist decision based on live action selling better than animated to an older audience even though Incredibles 2 more than proves with it's billion dollar revenue that animated sells just fine to its target demographic, which is the same as the Sonic franchise's on a whole; kids.

Bottom line though is that you're comparison to comic characters like Captain America and Rocket don't work because they did not change a human male into something other than a human male and they did not change a bipedal racoon into anything other than a bipedal racoon. With Sonic however they took the structure that his details go onto, an anthropomorphic animal in the vein of Mickey Mouse and Felix the Cat, and got rid of it in favor of what most people are seeing as a human male. That is a powerful distinction and one that can't be ignored. The details being the same is nice and all, but you could put the ads in Times Square on your house and say it's effectively the same because it's the Times Square ads still. But doing so completely ignores the architecture under the details and that architecture is every bit as important as the details attached to it.

I apologize if my tone comes across as aggressive, but at the bare minimum I hope this helps you see the problem with your comparison; Sonic in the movie design has different architecture under his details unlike most of your examples and ignoring that in favor of the details only is cutting out half or more of the design and what makes it iconic.

I know Sonic and Cap aren't the same species nor do they have the same design philosophy. But the intention and logic behind both of these movie designs is literally the same. "How can we bring this character into the real world and make them look believable". Regardless of if Sonic was based on Felix the Cat and Mickey Mouse, this movie's goal was to make him look like a real creature. Now we can debate whether this was the RIGHT choice for this character: the merits but the stylistic choice remains and the only thing left to do is rationalize it.

 

Share this post


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

No Hedgehog has 6 giant points on the back of it's head that vaguely look like quills. No Hedgehog has green eyes or red sneakers. No Hedgehog stands on two feet and runs around at the speed of sound. These are all traits SPECIFIC to Sonic that the filmmakers included in their design.

Those thing are a lot more generic than you're giving them credit for. Fucking hell, Sonic didn't coin the idea of an anthropomorphic animal. A character can have a bullet list of resemblances and still only vaugely resemble their source material, and simply adding more of them isn't improving your point any.

 

Share this post


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

I know Sonic and Cap aren't the same species nor do they have the same design philosophy.

Holy shit that's exactly why the same approaches don't work for both. I genuinely don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who doesn't like Sonic's movie design, I still have to disagree with the idea that it looks nothing like Sonic.

1 minute ago, Diogenes said:

How are you going to downplay one of the most iconic and memorable parts of Sonic's design like this? You point out the green eyes, something his design didn't originally have, something he shares with some Sonic characters, any number of other cartoon characters, and actual people, something that's hardly noticeable if at all in anything but a close shot, but completely dismiss any concerns over the loss of a feature so iconic that it's part of Sonic Team's own logo and practically every other "silhouetted Sonic head" variant?

Personally I'm happy the eyes are separated. I wish that would carry over to his official design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PeterPancake said:

I know Sonic and Cap aren't the same species nor do they have the same design philosophy. But the intention and logic behind both of these movie designs is literally the same. "How can we bring this character into the real world and make them look believable". Regardless of if Sonic was based on Felix the Cat and Mickey Mouse, this movie's goal was to make him look like a real creature. Now we can debate whether this was the RIGHT choice for this character: the merits but the stylistic choice remains and the only thing left to do is rationalize it.

 

Sonic and Cap not being the same species is kind of irrelevant because Cap keeps the architecture his details are designed on while Sonic does not. Cap is still a human male in all of his main appearances in the comics and MCU while Sonic is not a Mickey Mouse/Felix the Cat design style character in the movie like he is in most of his main appearances. It's drastically different design philosophies for the sake of realism which Sonic was never designed to even imitate in any regard where as Captain America was designed to stand next to Hitler of all people as anti-Nazi war propaganda. Realism works for Cap because of why he was designed and the fact that he was not designed as a stylized analogue to begin with but as a human male following the same anatomical principles. Sonic doesn't have that luxury so as a result half of his design is thrown out to make him look believable, which is itself subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MadmanRB said:

Perhaps its because you didnt put it in Klingon? Or Dothraki?

Perhaps Elvish? :D

Alright, this kind of snark isn't called for. Make a point if you must, but don't transparently mock other members while you're at it.

That goes for everyone here. I'm not going to be issuing this warning twice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.