Jump to content
Badnik Mechanic

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

Recommended Posts

 

Ahaha. No.

There's a number of reasons why people are fairly dismissive of Boom, and by proxy or not, also dismissive of this potential film. And I shouldn't have to explain them because they're all so glaringly obvious. But as it appears necessary, here's a quick list.

  1.  Character designs: Big changes to what people have enjoyed for at least the past 1 years, possibly longer if you consider the fact that lots of people have enjoy every design to date. The Boom designs are a massive departure to those.
  2. 11 minute format: Short, humour driven episodes that are very unlikely to be plot driven and likely to be quite shallow.
  3. Action-comedy: Even less likely to be plot driven. Will most likely rely on very poor jokes.
  4. Age demographic: Sonic fans come in all ages, but SEGA seems to be banking more on making Sonic a success with the younger crowd. As such, Boom is being made for 6 - 11 year-olds in mind specifically. Not exactly appealing to everyone.
  5. Recent games: They're pretty indicative of some of the above points (to varying degrees). Lots of people don't like that.
  6. Any and all of the above could apply to the potential movie. SEGA would be playing a very odd game if they create a TV show for Sonic that's meant to appeal to a new generation, and then create a Sonic movie that's not got even the character designs in common.

 

1. Valid

2. You want a show about a blue hedgehog to be highly plot driven?

3. The jokes might be ok, we don't know.

4. They've been appealing to younger kids since Unleashed.

5. Quality of the games is irrelevant, a different medium and staff. Iizuka isn't controlling the whole show.

6. Possibly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Any and all of the above could apply to the potential movie. SEGA would be playing a very odd game if they create a TV show for Sonic that's meant to appeal to a new generation, and then create a Sonic movie that's not got even the character designs in common.

It would be stupid if they did that, yes. And that's the worst part, because logically that would extrapolate to them changing the games' character designs as well to keep it consistent with what people saw in the promotional TV show and movie.

If it takes place in the same universe as Sonic 06, that would be way too stupid for me.

*huge, uncropped image*

What. Nobody even suggested this and there's nothing to indicate even the most remote possibility that this would be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Valid

2. You want a show about a blue hedgehog to be highly plot driven?

3. The jokes might be ok, we don't know.

4. They've been appealing to younger kids since Unleashed.

5. Quality of the games is irrelevant, a different medium and staff. Iizuka isn't controlling the whole show.

6. Possibly.

 

There are Sonic fans of all ages. Even though it's always been a kid-orientated series, there's plenty of opportunities for it to have a wider appeal while still keeping it's focus. SatAM, Underground, X. All plot driven. It doesn't have to be a huge and dramatic over-arching plot, but I'd definitely prefer to have something to tie the series together instead of random episodes of every-day shenanigans. It would give some degree of substance to the show and would be one of the better ways to broaden it's appeal while keeping it in line with the games if so desired. It would at least help it to feel more familiar even if the plots remained wholly independent.

 

Some people don't like the direction of the games as a direction of the series, which so far seems to be pretty indicative of what Boom will be. Iizka and the other staff don't matter much when talking about what the franchise should and shouldn't be.

 

Talking too much about Sonic Boom in this topic, But if this movie is ever to happen, I still remain pretty certain that the two will be related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Age demographic: Sonic fans come in all ages, but SEGA seems to be banking more on making Sonic a success with the younger crowd. As such, Boom is being made for 6 - 11 year-olds in mind specifically. Not exactly appealing to everyone.

The Sonic series always been centered around that demographic first and foremost.  The way they execute it, however, has always differed based on current trends.  I don't see how Boom is any different in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ahaha. No.

There's a number of reasons why people are fairly dismissive of Boom regardless of how little we know about it(but we do know some things beyond character design). And by proxy or not, there are plenty of reasons to also be dismissive of this potential film. And I shouldn't have to explain them because they're all so glaringly obvious. But as it appears necessary, here's a quick list.

  •  Character designs: Big changes to what people have enjoyed for at least the past 1 years, possibly longer if you consider the fact that lots of people have enjoy every design to date. The Boom designs are a massive departure to those.
  • 11 minute format: Short, humour-basesd episodes that are very unlikely to be plot driven and likely to be quite shallow.
  • Action-comedy: Even less likely to be plot driven. Will most likely rely on very poor jokes.
  • Age demographic: Sonic fans come in all ages, but SEGA seems to be banking more on making Sonic a success with the younger crowd. As such, Boom is being made for 6 - 11 year-olds in mind specifically. Not exactly appealing to everyone.
  • Recent games: They're pretty good examples of some of the above points (to varying degrees). Lots of people don't like what they've seen so far.
  • Any and all of the above could apply to the potential movie. SEGA would be playing a very odd game if they create a TV show for Sonic that's meant to appeal to a new generation, and then create a Sonic movie that's not got even the character designs in common.

 

 

Agreed.

 

But with the demographic. Well, we'll have to see how they pull it out. After all, MLP:FiM was originally targeted for little kids and their parents, and look at how popular it has become with older demographics. (I'mjustusingthisshowasanexamplepleasedon'tmakethisaponythread)

 

The action-comedy thingy. Well, maybe if the humor was a bit like Lost World it could come out as funny while still keeping the action part intact. I'm not saying LW was the epitome of all Sonic humor but it's something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sonic series always been centered around that demographic first and foremost.  The way they execute it, however, has always differed based on current trends.  I don't see how Boom is any different in that regard.

 

Not exactly true. Everybody's favourite installments, ShTH and '06, were blatantly aimed higher. And I'd argue that between '98 and and '08/9, they did as much to appeal to older fans as younger ones. The games nowadays are much more childish than they ever were before, and (again with the speculation) Boom seems like it will continue the recent trend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should've seen the Ben 10 fanbase when they saw Omniverse's art direction.

I searched for it, reminds me of that terrible Speed Racer next generation.  

 

 

 

Ahaha. No.

There's a number of reasons why people are fairly dismissive of Boom regardless of how little we know about it(but we do know some things beyond character design). And by proxy or not, there are plenty of reasons to also be dismissive of this potential film. And I shouldn't have to explain them because they're all so glaringly obvious. But as it appears necessary, here's a quick list.

  •  Character designs: Big changes to what people have enjoyed for at least the past 1 years, possibly longer if you consider the fact that lots of people have enjoy every design to date. The Boom designs are a massive departure to those.
  • 11 minute format: Short, humour-basesd episodes that are very unlikely to be plot driven and likely to be quite shallow.
  • Action-comedy: Even less likely to be plot driven. Will most likely rely on very poor jokes.
  • Age demographic: Sonic fans come in all ages, but SEGA seems to be banking more on making Sonic a success with the younger crowd. As such, Boom is being made for 6 - 11 year-olds in mind specifically. Not exactly appealing to everyone.
  • Recent games: They're pretty good examples of some of the above points (to varying degrees). Lots of people don't like what they've seen so far.
  • Any and all of the above could apply to the potential movie. SEGA would be playing a very odd game if they create a TV show for Sonic that's meant to appeal to a new generation, and then create a Sonic movie that's not got even the character designs in common.

 

Sega's direction with Sonic seems entirely scatterbrained enough to simultaneously produce both a movie and TV show that have nothing in common.  

 

 

1. Valid

2. You want a show about a blue hedgehog to be highly plot driven?

3. The jokes might be ok, we don't know.

4. They've been appealing to younger kids since Unleashed.

5. Quality of the games is irrelevant, a different medium and staff. Iizuka isn't controlling the whole show.

6. Possibly.

2. I'm not sure plot driven means what you think it means.  Think about what that those two words mean, a story driven primarily by events that take place than due to specific decisions of the characters.  For example, Sonic 3 is plot driven.  

 

3. Keep Sturgeon's Law in mind and recall how hard humor actually is.  

 

4. Doesn't matter.  

 

5. The staff of this show does not bode well for its production.  The major red flag for me are the people who worked on FiM, AKA, Reaction gifs: the show.

 

6. I'm not expecting anything explicitly Sonic the Movie the Game, I suspect the worst that could happen would be Halo and their incorporation of the dumb stuff from the Halo novels.  For those of you not already familiar, the orogin of the Spartan 2s had nothing to do with the covenant, it basically amounted to "let's kidnap some children to turn into super soldiers because why not?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly true. Everybody's favourite installments, ShTH and '06, were blatantly aimed higher. And I'd argue that between '98 and and '08/9, they did as much to appeal to older fans as younger ones. The games nowadays are much more childish than they ever were before, and (again with the speculation) Boom seems like it will continue the recent trend.

I'd argue the core demographic is still there.  Shadow and '06 had some attempts to aim at the older demographic, sure, but the dark, gritty blockbuster trope was pretty popular among children at the time as well.  The perceived attempt at targeting the older demographic was probably just deemed as a bonus on their part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's hard to say what is and isn't popular with kids without actual statistics, because common consensuses seems to be that somehow children mostly enjoy cartoony stuff yet make up a sizable portion of the install base of shooters and other dark, violent games. Without some numbers, it's a pointless game to play; ultimately though, children just enjoy entertainment across a wide range of aesthetics and maturity levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's hard to say what is and isn't popular with kids without actual statistics, because common consensuses seems to be that somehow children mostly enjoy cartoony stuff yet make up a sizable portion of the install base of shooters and other dark, violent games. Without some numbers, it's a pointless game to play; ultimately though, children just enjoy entertainment across a wide range of aesthetics and maturity levels.

Which I think only furthers my point that they weren't aiming specifically for a higher age demographic, but a different demographic of the same age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Blue Blood is saying is that the series always felt more like a series that everyone could enjoy in some way, as in there were aspects that appealed to every demographic. Nowadays, it just feels like they're catering to the lowest common denominator. 

That's my stance on it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know.  I'm of the mindset that they cover an even wider range today because (as it appears to me) they're focused more on telling a story (rather good or bad is one's own personal opinion) rather than telling a story for a specific audience.  I don't know; I don't see its appeal being any different on the basis of age

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the deliberate introduction of infinitely more puns and jokes, as well as shying away from a lot of the implications, themes, and body counts of the more action or sci-fi oriented entries like the Adventures, ShtH, and Unleashed in some instances, does skew younger. Colors is wholly a more children's-oriented story (underwear puns and gas jokes are not the hallmarks of teen or adult-oriented comedy), and was stated by Sonic Team that it was designed as such. Generations and Lost World has just kinda continued on in this vain. The fact that teens and adults continue to enjoy the games isn't mutually exclusive from authorial intent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the deliberate introduction of infinitely more puns and jokes, as well as shying away from a lot of the implications, themes, and body counts of the more action or sci-fi oriented entries like the Adventures, ShtH, and Unleashed in some instances, does skew younger. Colors is wholly a more children's-oriented story (underwear puns and gas jokes are not the hallmarks of teen or adult-oriented comedy), and was stated by Sonic Team that it was designed as such. Generations and Lost World has just kinda continued on in this vain. The fact that teens and adults continue to enjoy the games isn't mutually exclusive from authorial intent.

And I'm not saying it is.  But the fact that the games had some "mature" moments or had traits that older audiences enjoyed doesn't mean they were immediately aimed at general audiences, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I'm not saying it is.  But the fact that the games had some "mature" moments or had traits that older audiences enjoyed doesn't mean they were immediately aimed at general audiences, either.

 

The games also had far fewer childish moments. I think that counts for a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I'm not saying it is.  But the fact that the games had some "mature" moments or had traits that older audiences enjoyed doesn't mean they were immediately aimed at general audiences, either.

 

I never really argued that they were necessarily for "general audiences" so much as I'm arguing that the newer games are indeed more childish than most of the games that came beforehand, not due to who enjoys what but rather based on the characteristics of the games and the intent of Sonic Team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The games also had far fewer childish moments. I think that counts for a lot.

By who's definition of childish?  A shallow villain who wants to take over the world with the aid of giant monster while a super-powered talking animal attempts to stop him sounds pretty childish to me.  Not in a bad way, mind you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you take out the giant monster, you still have the premise for the newer Sonic games anyway. Regardless, I don't think parsing down concepts into their most basic levels makes for a convincing argument in terms of who a property is geared towards because it completely ignores context in execution. A man dressing up in bat-based tights because his parents died is a childish concept, but that doesn't mean I would recommended The Dark Knight to young children. xP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By who's definition of childish?  A shallow villain who wants to take over the world with the aid of giant monster while a super-powered talking animal attempts to stop him sounds pretty childish to me.  Not in a bad way, mind you.

 Are you intentionally disregarding elements that Nepenthe already pointed out?

 

That's what we mean by childish. To say the games haven't shifted in tone and target audience to at least a certain extent is pretty stubborn. That, and SEGA themselves did say so.

 

wow the preview pic is surprisingly fitting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Are you intentionally disregarding elements that Nepenthe already pointed out?

 

That's what we mean by childish. To say the games haven't shifted in tone and target audience to at least a certain extent is pretty stubborn. That, and SEGA themselves did say so.

And that's somehow more childish than a slow-talking purple cat clearly akin to Goofy or Patrick Star?  No.  The slow-talking character is a typical "kids cartoon" attempt at humor, no less so than underwear to be worn by salad.  Not to mention Amy's attraction for Sonic to his obvious disdain is not exactly the pinnacle of post-pubescent relationships either.

 

Sega mentioned that Colors was aimed at younger audiences, yes, but they didn't say that every game before it wasn't.  Plus, it was mainly an attempt, from what I remember of it, to emphasize how Sonic 4 was supposedly meant for the older fans.  Have they changed in tone?  Certainly.  But once again, that's a matter of a different demographic within the same age range, and to suggest otherwise is stubbornly boiling down everything to the thought that "older audiences = less stupid jokes."

 

Also, Nepenthe's posts were made at roughly the same time as mine, so naturally I missed them.  Still, they don't change my outlook by that much.  Furthermore...

 

If you take out the giant monster, you still have the premise for the newer Sonic games anyway. Regardless, I don't think parsing down concepts into their most basic levels makes for a convincing argument in terms of who a property is geared towards because it completely ignores context in execution. A man dressing up in bat-based tights because his parents died is a childish concept, but that doesn't mean I would recommended The Dark Knight to young children. xP

My point was that it's something that children would enjoy.  Rather or not the Dark Knight is recommended or even intended for younger audiences is only partially relevant as the fact that children make up a sizable amount of their revenue means companies are going to try to emulate it with them in mind, as Sega apparently has done for the past... well, ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But once again, children can enjoy media across a wide range of aesthetics. This does not mean that works that may be broadly defined as "for children" cannot still skew younger or older within that parameter. Sonic Adventure can be enjoyed by kids like Sonic Colors, but Colors even more so, and that is specifically due to the fact that Sonic Team blatantly admitted to engineering the latter as such; thus the content in the game is objectively different from Sonic Adventure. In this specific context, you can easily argue in turn that Sonic Adventure skews a bit older than Colors simply by the fact that it includes both less material deliberately geared towards kids and subsequently more material that's less child-friendly as translator puns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say that the content in modern Sonic isn't different than that of Adventure and those before.  I merely mentioned the fact that there were more things that could draw older audiences in didn't necessarily mean it was done with older audiences in mind.  Sure, they could attempt to make it enjoyable to all different audiences, but there's no indication that the previous games did indeed make those changes deliberately.  From a social standpoint, I certainly don't remember any adults aside from those who grew up with Sonic (and even then it was kind of far and in between) claiming Adventure was mature or enjoyable from an adult's standpoint back in 1999.

 

Also, I don't even remember Sega saying Colors was meant specifically for younger gamers as much as they said that they anticipate that younger gamers would enjoy it.  On that same note, they said that Sonic 4 was meant mainly for the older fanbase, but its content was no less objectionable than Colors.  In fact, it was even friendlier as far as I can see.  (But then, Sonic 4 didn't even have a plot, so I guess there's not much of a basis to compare to in that regard)  And, again, the fact that they said Colors was meant for the younger fans doesn't mean that the previous games weren't, and for that matter, I don't think there was any elaboration on the point they made with that.  From what I understood, they could easily have just meant that the kids would probably enjoy 3D Sonic, while the adults would enjoy the side-scrolling perspective since that's the kind of game they were accustomed to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never been much of a critic, and am pretty much a child at heart with my enthusiasm for this franchise and others... while there's all this cynicism about Lost World, Boom, and this, I'm most definitely interested in seeing the movie.

So long as there's no unnecessary plot devices like one-shot human friends or live action humans I think it'll be fine. I'll definitely be planning a Sonic Nevada meet around it, I can tell you that much. tongue.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Akito: I've not really argued that the older games were made with a specific audience in mind; rather that the newer games are, or at least are merely skewing younger than what the series was otherwise doing beforehand regardless of whether the tone of the older games was intentionally meant to target older gamers, so I guess in a sense I agree with you? True, you don't need to make your media with specific age groups in mind to target, and that may or may not be what Sonic Team was doing at the time, but the overall feeling I still get is this: The Sonic games we're getting are more childish than they used to be.

 

Also, Iizuka specifically said that Colors was meant to be played by the 6-12 age range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I guess that depends on your definition of childish or what Sega apparently thinks is marketable to that demographic at the time.  Sega apparently finds these sort of games to be marketable to that age range, while during the Adventure era, they thought that those types of games would be more marketable to that same age range.  And  they were right in 1999.  I don't know about today, though.

 

But I mean, if that's what you consider more childish, then eh, to each their own.  I can understand it.  I just don't agree with it.

 

Also, in that same article is this quote-


I think that there are two types of Sonic players.

One is the people who have played since the MegaDrive, who are mainly fans of 2D Sonic games and didn’t really play the 3D Sonic games so much. For those gamers Sonic Team will be giving them Sonic 4 [for Xbox Live and PlayStation Network] so they can pick the Sonic game they want to play.

The other is the ones who have played 3D Sonic games and felt that the game was too difficult. Sonic Colours is the game for those types of players. It’s still a 3D Sonic game but the controls are more user-friendly; it’s an easy to pick up and play type of game.

So through the two Sonic games I feel the needs of both of the two core groups of Sonic fans are being addressed.”

 

It sounds to me like they were referring to the gameplay, not necessarily the story.

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   1 member

×
×
  • 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.