Sonic the Hedgehog (Post-release)
- Thread starter AJTaliesen
- Start date
They do indeed have spines on their back, but do also have fur on them too
Gimpdiggity
Master Member
Of course they do...on their stomach.
They certainly aren’t furry like a squirrel or a rabbit, which is what the design of this movie’s Sonic seems to imply.
And on their faces.
Gimpdiggity
Master Member
Give it a rest. You clearly understand my point.
Interesting you thought I was doing anything other than just adding info to the conversation.
Gimpdiggity
Master Member
My apologies if that’s all you’re doing, however, it’s coming across as slightly nitpicky.
Again, apologies if that’s just me misinterpreting your posts.
No apology needed. It was my fault. I certainly didn't make it clear that I wasn't being argumentative, so I apologise for that.
Cephus
Master Member
You have one chance to grab people and they've already failed. I asked both of my daughters, who are huge Sonic and old school gaming fans (my youngest is playing Spyro right this minute) and both of them say that it doesn't matter what they do to the movie, they will never see it. They squandered their only chance. Either you have a faithful adaptation of the games on screen or you don't. It isn't just Sonic that proved that this isn't a good movie. That was just the worst aspect.
Maybe they didn’t know what a cruddy product they had until It was late in production. Some producers are so divorced from the creative process this is not uncommon.
In that case I can seeing them making a Hail Mary play for attention.
It’s plausible.
Cephus
Master Member
The point is, they should have. They should have known what the product was before they made the movie. The fact that Sonic would up looking like that proves they didn't know what they were doing. Just redoing the model won't make the rest of the movie better. I don't know if this is a case of producers and studio interference, or having a director who didn't know what he was doing and didn't care, but if you release a trailer looking like that, your whole project is lost. You didn't know what you were doing when it mattered. You screwed up and it's not fixable, especially in a couple of months. It looks so bad, it really needs to go back to concept and start over.
I think we’re coming from roughly the same place, then. More often than not, a movie based on some video game IP, is driven by a desire to blindly exploit public trends for an easy payday. It’s the same driving force behind studios spending multimillions to reproduce the formula for cinematic universes as successful as the MCU.
It’s rare when there’s an actual talented creative artistic force driving a production. I don’t think it’s a matter of studio interference because I think production was more likely rotten from the ground up. This movie is simply another product of number crunching and market speculation.
Should they scrap the whole thing and make a better movie? Probably but they won’t. Studios are often quick to write off ill-fated movies rather than infuse big money into something projected to be a flop in the hopes that they can overcome a bad start. I think they’ll just do what they can to protect themselves from loss and fake controversy seems to me a cheap fix.
Cephus
Master Member
Except this clearly wasn't trying to exploit the game, it was taking something in pop culture and trying to make a buck off of it without understanding what it was or why anyone likes it. A lot of video game movies do this, they take a generic action movie and slap a name on it and maybe, take a couple of elements from the game, but otherwise, it's all generic. They want to make it on the cheap without having the slightest idea what it is in the first place. I'm willing to bet most of the people who made the Sonic movie have never played the games. It's like the people who are making Detective Pikachu probably aren't fans of the Pokemon franchise. It's just a license to exploit.
That's why fans of the original franchise, seeing this disaster of a trailer, are probably going to stay away in droves. You can't just stick a pretty face on the movie after you've already proven you have no knowledge and no respect for the franchise itself. If studios wanted to make money on this, they wouldn't half-ass it in the first place. This probably could have been a decent movie if they had just put fans in charge of it in the first place. Now, it's dead in the water and they made it that way.
We’re saying the same thing. I wasn’t implying that a fake controversy would have been effective or even a good idea. My only point was that the controversy seemed contrived.
Cephus
Master Member
Most supposed controversies are.
Strikerkc
Sr Member
Spring Time for Hitler...
I doubt it though. Just cause they can write a movie off as a loss, just means they don't pay taxes on the money they spent on it... The don't get their money back. Paying 45% taxes on $10M is better than losing $10M.
And honestly, they may just want to try and make a good movie. I liked the preview in every way but how Sonic looked. If they can somehow fix it, I'm in.
Last edited:
Gimpdiggity
Master Member
This is how I feel.
Sonic’s look was the only thing I found really off putting about it.
charlesedward
New Member
Movies based on video games don't always go well. With all the redesigning and fixing of Sonic's model, do you guys think the movie will have the same faith as Mario Bros from 1993? While it does feature famous actors like Jim Carrey, Neal McDonough (played Bison in The Legend of Chun-Li) and more.
Let me know your thoughts.
Let me know your thoughts.
I think video game movies CAN go well, if they are done by people interested in the video games storyline.
Unfortunately, they are usually like this, which I feel safe betting is going to be a pile of garbage on parr with emoji movie. Even from the trailer it's obvious that this wasn't written by someone who loved the Sonic story and wanted to see it adapted to film. This was written by someone who wanted a paycheck and probably got hired by someone who figured that the name would sell enough in tickets to offset the cost of the rights.
From the trailer it looks like a template. Not only that, but it's a template that pretty much almost always results in stinky garbage.
The template is: Character from game/classic cartoon/popular commercial/toy franchise... finds themselves in modern America. Whackiness ensues. Then trouble is caused, either by their presence, or by the presence of their enemy and blamed on them. They fix the problem using the abilities that were featured in previous franchise commercials (because the writer of the movie probably didn't even bother to read all of the source material). Everyone now loves _insert character here_. The day is saved. Human sidekick probably also has personal problem solved along the way, usually resulting in getting the girl.
We've seen this exact template dozens of times and it pretty much always stinks.
edit: Hope I didn't spoil the movie for anyone by not putting that in tags.
