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

[Gabz Girl]

Genuine question: When an animation/live action hybrid is mentioned, does that typically imply that the latter makes up a large chunk or even a majority of the movie?

 

I'm wondering if the use of live action in the movie would mainly just be restricted to portraying the more realistic locations that the series has already used; like, for instance, filming in San Francisco for a City Escape-like sequence or in New York for a scene in "Station Square." I could also see humans being used for characters like the G.U.N. Commander or the President from SA2. However, all of the other more fantastical areas as well as the main cast (including Dr. Eggman) would be fully animated.

 

I'm not sure if that's what they're actually going for, but I would be okay with that kind of balance.

 

I'm actually hoping we're getting something like this with the Sonic movie; the characters are all CGI except for the backgrounds, humans and maybe (let's hope not!) Dr Eggman. None of this "Sonic and his friends travel to Earth and hijinks ensue." Have it set in a world similar to ours except for the anthros walking around and similar looking locations, maybe make it more fantastical or sci fi too. This also means more focus on Sonic himself and no annoying human characters. >>

[Willsy]

Could use more people like that who aren't so easily jimmy-rustled by the mere presence of live-action.

I think "jimmy-rustled" is an incorrect term to use here. People are worried and understandably so. This is the same studio behind similar CGI/live action ventures, all of which did not fare well or resonate well. I'm not saying that the film will be bad, I have faith that Van can write a good script. (But at the same time, there are so many other factors, and what's not to say that this film will be subject to the corporate fuckery that plagued the Spiderman movies for so long?)

It's not people getting their knickers into a twist over nothing, it's people worrying about how a franchise they like will be handled by a studio with a mixed track record. That's perfectly understandable, at least to me, since Alvin and Smurfs weren't exactly considered to be Oscar worthy.

Sonic was never wacky

A series about a blue hedgehog that can run at the speed of sound who's arch nemesis is a mad scientist shaped like an egg sounds pretty damn wacky to me. Sonic started going down hill when they tried to make the series more serious, it didn't work because it didn't fit.

[FriendBot]

Then I guess having a rich man dress up as a bat or a kid getting bit by a fucking spider and gains spider powers are totally the ideal way of a dark-toned story.

Dude, come on just because Sonic is a cartoon animal, doesn't mean he can't be taken seriously. I mean dark-toned stories of Sonic can be done very well, like in SatAM or Adventure 2. The series have proven that it can be taken seriously without making a complete fool of itself. One of the biggest complaints I've heard about the current direction is the fact it doesn't take itself seriously and it makes fun of itself because of how supposedly "silly" it is.

I always looked at Sonic as an action/adventure series where talking animals can do pretty badass things. They can be silly and I'm okay with that but there also needs to be some serious situations since the life of Sonic the Hedgehog isn't all sunshine and rainbows.

I'd prefer a mix of both tones to make it an overall enjoyable experience.

[Badnik Mechanic]

Dude, come on just because Sonic is a cartoon animal, doesn't mean he can't be taken seriously. I mean dark-toned stories of Sonic can be done very well, like in SatAM or Adventure 2. The series have proven that it can be taken seriously without making a complete fool of itself. One of the biggest complaints I've heard about the current direction is the fact it doesn't take itself seriously and it makes fun of itself because of how supposedly "silly" it is.

 

Nobody is saying that.

 

But if you're opening gambit is "Sonic was never wacky and goofy" especially when in reference to the early/original years, you're completely wrong.

[FriendBot]

And when did I say that Sonic was always serious?

I know that Sonic shouldn't be like Dark Knight levels of grittiness but come on, let the series take itself seriously for once.

[Willsy]

Then I guess having a rich man dress up as a bat or a kid getting bit by a fucking spider and gains spider powers are totally the ideal way of a dark-toned story.

Dude, come on just because Sonic is a cartoon animal, doesn't mean he can't be taken seriously. I mean dark-toned stories of Sonic can be done very well, like in SatAM or Adventure 2. The series have proven that it can be taken seriously without making a complete fool of itself. One of the biggest complaints I've heard about the current direction is the fact it doesn't take itself seriously and it makes fun of itself because of how supposedly "silly" it is.

I always looked at Sonic as an action/adventure series where talking animals can do pretty badass things. They can be silly and I'm okay with that but there also needs to be some serious situations since the life of Sonic the Hedgehog isn't all sunshine and rainbows.

I'd prefer a mix of both tones to make it an overall enjoyable experience.

I wasn't saying that Sonic couldn't be taken seriously, I was saying that the series by default is wacky and cartoony. It can get serious at times, and I actually think that's a good thing for the sake of storytelling. It's just that attempts to make an entire Sonic game serious (like 06 or Shadow for example) felt out of place besides being poorly done.

I feel that Unleashed handled it best. It got serious at times but it never deviated from the light-heartedness of the series.

[Badnik Mechanic]

And when did I say that Sonic was always serious?

I know that Sonic shouldn't be like Dark Knight levels of grittiness but come on, let the series take itself seriously for once.

 

You didn't the guy who posted before you did which is who we were replying too before you started the spiderman angle.

[FriendBot]

And the same can be said about lighthearted Sonic as well with the groan worthy jokes, no sense of conflict at all and some other problems that I might not know.

Sonic is wacky no doubt but there is still some sense of believability in its world, which is we still love the characters, its world and etc. And as I said before, Sonic can be both silly and serious. The best example I could think of that could relate to what I want from the series is Kung Fu Panda, it finds that balance pretty well with the second film a bit more darker than the first and people loved those movies, whose to say that Sonic can't do the same?

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

It's not people getting their knickers into a twist over nothing, it's people worrying about how a franchise they like will be handled by a studio with a mixed track record. That's perfectly understandable, at least to me, since Alvin and Smurfs weren't exactly considered to be Oscar worthy.

 

"Understandable" as one may think it to be, it doesn't change the fact that at heart it's still a discrimination of sorts, where too many people condemn it on status of having live-action alone, when there actually have been live-action adaptations that have worked. And it annoys me to the point of sickening me, I'm afraid.

[Komodin]

"Understandable" as one may think it to be, it doesn't change the fact that at heart it's still a discrimination of sorts, where too many people condemn it on status of having live-action alone, when there actually have been live-action adaptations that have worked. And it annoys me to the point of sickening me, I'm afraid.

 

Their point is that there is enough of a precedent of poorly made/received live-action adaptations of animated works that they're not exactly unjustified in erring on the side of caution until they get further information on how the movie will be.

[Nepenthe]

Live-action/CGI adaptations of children's properties are almost always terrible, mainly because studios can count on the brand name and increased revenue of a child having to be accompanied by family to make a decent amount back. Even if only one person wants to see it, you're more than likely still getting like three times the money anyway, so there's no reason to try. Michael Bay will happily tell you that with a straight face, and it's basically why it was such a shock to everyone on Earth that Paddington actually ascended the hilariously low bar set by the films in its genre. So asking us to put blind hope in this film because of, like, Paddington is like, I don't know, asking us to put hope in EA that they'll stop closing studios. Shitty patterns create shitty expectations.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

Their point is that there is enough of a precedent of poorly made/received live-action adaptations of animated works that they're not exactly unjustified in erring on the side of caution until they get further information on how the movie will be.

The people who may be cautionary of it with some doubts, I'm fine with. It's the people who outright say it's bound/destined to be bad on the basis of out having live action are the lot that annoy me.

[Gabz Girl]

Yeah Paddington was a huge surprise. I mean I haven't seen it but apparently it has all the charm and heart of the original books (and animated series) which the trailers didn't really show. There's a tiny chance the Sonic movie might be like Paddington, but I doubt it since this is Sony Pictures we're talking about and not Studio Canal. 8(

[Salamander]

Then I guess having a rich man dress up as a bat or a kid getting bit by a fucking spider and gains spider powers are totally the ideal way of a dark-toned story.

 

I think there are ways of disguising the silliness of a premise when your entire cast is human and you can replicate their appearances without CGI.

[Marcello]

Maybe the movie will be good or maybe it won't, but I have no reason to believe SEGA, Sony Pictures or Van will deliver a quality product here.

 

And yeah, a big worry is the fact that's a live-action/CGI hybrid movie. Sonic will likely look out of place and I'm worried about what they'll do with Eggman. I'm, not sure an actual person playing him would work well, but a CG Eggman among live humans could look weird, too.

 

I guess we'll have to just wait and see.

 

And for what it's worth, I don't really have any problem with movies like the Smurfs or Alvin and the Chipmunks. In fact, I think live action/CG makes the most sense for Alvin and the Chipmunks.

[Tani Coyote]

I think there are ways of disguising the silliness of a premise when your entire cast is human and you can replicate their appearances without CGI.

More or less yes.

I really question why it was reasoned to have a live action element at all. Do we not remember how even animated realistic humans like Elise looked REALLY weird next to Sonic and co.?

[shdowhunt60]

I wasn't saying that Sonic couldn't be taken seriously, I was saying that the series by default is wacky and cartoony. It can get serious at times, and I actually think that's a good thing for the sake of storytelling. It's just that attempts to make an entire Sonic game serious (like 06 or Shadow for example) felt out of place besides being poorly done.

I feel that Unleashed handled it best. It got serious at times but it never deviated from the light-heartedness of the series.

How is Unleashed lighthearted? It was constantly droning on about how the world was going to end, and how that was inevitable. It just had a bunch of uneccessary filler moments where Chip acted wacky, and totally not annoying at all.

And once again, the tone is not what was wrong with Shadow or 06. They're terrible irregardless of tone. They're bad stories by virtue of being bad. They could've been nothing but bouncing balls, balloons, and rainbows and they would still be shit. Did everyone just forget how awful Lost World and Shattered Crystal were?

Jesus, I really hate people using tone of a story being a criteria for whether or not a story is good. I see it on both sides, and it's really, really dumb.

[FriendBot]

Well I thought Lost World's story, while heavily flawed, had really interesting ideas whether it was the idea that it was Sonic's fault that the world is doomed or Tails feels that Sonic lost trust on him and a couple more. P&G didn't do it to the best of their abilities but I feel that they did a decent enough job.

 

When it comes to either Shattered Crystal, it's pretty inoffensive. Outside of the "piece of meat", nothing about the story really pissed me off. I actually thought Boom Shadow in this game was pretty good.

 

Unleashed had a balance between light and dark tones, which is what the tone Sonic stories should have. Sometimes, make it a bit more lighter or a bit more darker to keep things fresh.

[Myst]

Personally, I consider Sonic 2's coverart to have one of the creepiest designs of Eggman ever. He has no eyeballs, just two black holes in his head! And that is one twisted grin on his face.

 

Anyway, I never meant that Sonic is supposed to be 100% serious, obviously there should be humor. Sonic himself is a laid-back, thrill-seeking wiseguy. I don't want Sonic to be grimdark. (I specifically said I considered the Genesis games to have dark UNDERtones to them, I never thought they were overt and in your face)

 

I just meant there should be a dramatic core to the story, and there should be a sense of real danger. Eggman should be a real threat and not a bumbling oaf like he has been since 2010.
 

I always felt when getting to the final stages of the Genesis games that it was an epic showdown between good vs. evil. Robotnik, to me, was a truly evil villain who just happened to have a few humorous quirks about him. I think Sonic Adventure 2 displayed that brillantly. He was competent. The game started with him busting into a military facility (Solo, I might add, no idiotic robot henchmen acting clumsy and bickering with each other here) firing off his rifle, laughing maniacally. He bombed an entire island, and threatened the planet with a weapon of mass destruction. He nearly sent Sonic to his death and didn't even care when he thought he finally killed him. He held a rifle to Amy's head, and showed a contemplative side at times, like during the ending.
 

But he still showed off a humorous side, stomping his feet when realizing the Cannon needed all seven Emeralds and scratching his butt whilst watching TV. He was funny, but he wasn't a pathetic moron who failed at everything he did and he didn't have his own henchmen mocking him.  That is the Eggman I want. Someone who poses a true challenge to Sonic and Tails, Someone to be feared by an ordinary person, who is capable of diabolical things, but will still make you laugh here and there.

 

I just don't want the movie to be Colors or Generations levels of silliness. Something more akin to the Adventure games (Maybe even a tad bit more serious than that) would be okay with me.

 

Just because the main character is a talking hedgehog doesn't mean there can't be some seriousness to the storyline. Look at Guardians of the Galaxy. That movie had a gun-toting talking Raccoon in it.

[a knothole resident]

All this talk of the classic games.  Just have the movie take place on Mobius instead of boring Los Angeles or New York.  And no, calling either of those metropolis cites Station Square isn't going to save it.  Give us something original, creative, and imaginative.  Mobius, Green Hill Zone, especially GREEN HILL ZONE.  I would love to see those origami flowers and checkerboard landscapes in live action, instead of modern skyscrapers and traffic that I see everyday. 

 

That's where these live action/CGI fail at.  They have a mystical world to build on at their disposal, but take the lazy route by doing the "portal to Earth" and using the "fish outta water" scenario.  Smurfs takes place in a fantasy medieval setting with monsters, dragons, wizards, knights and other types of whimsical creatures.  And Sony completely ignored all of that for the same formulaic shit.  Im not saying that the movie would be good, but it would at least have a sense of effort.

 

But whatever route Sonic takes, bad or good, it will be entertaining.  Hopefully a fun ride like Mario Bros.  Laughably bad, but not horrifically terrible like Dragon Ball Evolution or Last Airbender. 

[FriendBot]

I'm pretty sure, Van said that the movie won't be like those kinds of movies. I don't see any reason why to use the American canon since it was dropped a long time ago, so no Mobius. Green Hill can be there and stuff like that but it would be cool to see other locations we haven't seen in the games before.

[Myst]

You didn't the guy who posted before you did which is who we were replying too before you started the spiderman angle.

 

..Excuse-moi? I never said Sonic should be like The Dark Knight. I don't appreciate you putting  words in my mouth. =|

 

All I said was for the movie to take itself a little more seriously. There's been a recent trend of trying to make Sonic cute and silly. Colors, Boom TV Series and Lost World being prime examples.

 

SatAM, the Comics, the Adventure series and Unleashed were not like that at all. (Even the suckier Sonic games like Sonic 2006 and Shadow followed a more serious mold) I realize Sonic is a franchise meant for kids, but it's appeal came from the well, 'extreme' nature of it. Action is a central part of the character and the series as a whole. He fights giant robots, destroys massive spacestations, Levels Eggman's factories, and gets into fast-paced battles while techno/rock music blares in the background. He doesn't save a damsel in distress, he saves the planet from destruction, whether its from Eggman or some giant monster. He's even had brushes with death a couple of times.

 

While his competitor Mario has always been a silly franchise, (Nothing wrong with that, BTW) Sonic is a totally different thing. In addition to the action I just mentioned, the Sonic series has tackled drama many, many times in the past 20 years. Comics had love triangles, and Robotnik portrayed as a sinister tyrant. Adventure series had characters die (Maria was shot to death, Gerald executed, Shadow (temporarily) died, and a scene of Chao being killed by Knuckles ancestors.) Cities were wiped out too.
 

With the occasional exception of stuff like Heroes or AoStH, Sonic, (for the most part) is a story-driven action series with occasional bits of comedy to lighten things up. (Genesis games were a bit more simplistic, but still sent out a more serious vibe when getting to the final stages) That's all I want really. This new cutesy angle the series has been going for the past couple of years is getting real annoying. I'm not opposed to comedy in Sonic, I just don't want it to be 100% comedy, I want a good story to go along with it.

I like the Boom TV series becuase it is just a spinoff and not part of the main series canon, (Same applies to AoStH) but the movie is an entirely different thing, I feel it should be something with a bit more substance to it. I don't think that's a ridiculous thing to ask for.

[Badnik Mechanic]

All I said was for the movie to take itself a little more seriously. There's been a recent trend of trying to make Sonic cute and silly. Colors, Boom TV Series and Lost World being prime examples.

 

 

Actually all you said was...

 

 

Sonic was never wacky and goofy

 

Which we all know from Sonic 1, this isn't true.

[shdowhunt60]

 

Which we all know from Sonic 1, this isn't true.

Wait, Sonic 1 is wacky and goofy? I mean, it was bright and colorful, sure, but... Wacky and goofy? I mean, don't get it.

I also don't like the Original Intent argument. Because what's more important? Intent or execution? Isn't that what just about everyone who pans Sonic 06 says? "It doesn't matter what the game was supposed to be, I'm going to review what's in front of me"?

In addition, ideas grow and change, just look at anything that's remained popular for any long stretch of time. If there's no change or growth, then the idea stagnates and slowly dies. Sonic is almost 24 years old, I think it's perfectly acceptable for the series to move on from Green Hill Zone.

[Gabz Girl]

The idea of a blue hedgehog running around at the speed of sound, going through loop de loops and battling a fat scientist with a moustache and goofy grin sounds pretty whacky to me. =P That's why the idea of a Sonic game, or movie in this case, relying too much on the dark and edgy is ridiculous for a game series like Sonic the hedgehog. Sonic Adventure 1 balanced out the epic, dark (ish) story with the goofy cartoony stuff and so did the sequel to an extent. Then there's Sonic Unleashed and Sonic and the Black Knight...

 

Basically, a Sonic game that relies too much on dark and serious crap can come off as really cheesy and poorly executed.