Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The unthinkable has happened. A multi-billion dollar corporation, upon receiving negative feedback about a product, has taken that feedback to heart and fixed their product to ensure the fans (who will now hopefully pay to see the movie) are happy.

I really hope people put their money where their mouth is and go see the movie now. If they don't, this will be the last time a company ever listens to fans (looking at you Game Freak).

They could have very easily pulled a Star Wars and just called all the fans Toxic Soggy Knees Manbabies and hemorrhaged money like it was going out of style, but they actually did the right thing, hired a well known and highly talented member of the Sonic Fandom to help fix the design and followed though with it. I'm not even a "fan" of Sonic (Hot take: Sonic 1 is a bad game, Sonic 2 is alright and Sonic The Hedgehog 3 & Knuckles 2: Electric Boogaloo is perfection) and I plan on seeing the movie because, well, money and mouth and whatnot.

The movie is going to be a dumpster fire, and Jim Carrey has never funny, but it will hopefully be a "So-Bad-It's-Good" movie.

Still find it a bit creepy, but I felt the same about the Pokemon in Detective Pikachu.

At least this isn't the sort of creepy one can easily put their finger on, unlike the first attempt.

It does look WAY better. The sonic design i mean. Not the movie.

Now it just looks like a run of the mill bad movie for kids as opposed to a horrifying freak show. Looks really no better or worse than anything Sonic has been in. Lets not pretend he's ever really been great when we're not controlling him after all.

Sonic looks great though. Apparently the redesign was handled by the Sonic Mania guy? Seems like Sega just needs to make him the brand manager at this point.

A massive improvement (still suspect the movie will suck),

hope it does well enough that the redesign was seen as a positive (although for movies in general pre-screening and focus groups have probably ruined more films than they've improved)

So was the original trailer just something put out there to whip up a frenzy and this 'new' design always what was going to be seen in cinemas?

I haven't paid close attention to this story but find it hard to credit anyone thought the previous design acceptable in the face of what has apparently been achieved pretty easily.

You'll be telling me that studios believe Bob Hoskins can convincingly play an Italian-American plumber next.

 Riquende wrote:
You'll be telling me that studios believe Bob Hoskins can convincingly play an Italian-American plumber next.

Ha, good one. Speaking of Bob Hoskins, this movie as well as Detective Pikachu just look like Roger Rabbit/Space Jam type movies to me rather than "these things are real creatures".
The Sonic redesign, while less creepy than the original trailer, makes this worse IMO. Sure he looks more like that cartoon/game designed characters....but that means he looks like a cartoon.
The trailer makes it seem like he is an alien or from another dimension. But instead he just looks like a cartoon super-imposed over the screen....which, I mean, he is, but he's not SUPPOSED to look like that.

Part of it is that his anatomy doesn't look realistic. The gave him little quills on top of his big blue artist rendition quills. Are those still supposed to be quills, or are they part of his head? With like blood-flow inside it and everything?
IMO, this is what will make the movie a "mainly for kids" dumpster fire

-

No one actually put much thought into it, but if you NEED an answer, just assume that he styles his quills into larger spikes like that.

Detective Pikachu did a pretty good job of making its creatures seem like creatures in the world. I think the effect worked better in the wilderness areas and definitely felt more seamless with smaller Pokemon. It lost some of believeability with some of the larger creatures in the city (and Torterra) but I liked it more than not.

The Pokemon looks were probably my favorite thing about Detective Pikachu. They still looked like the ones seen in the games and the anime, but at the same time like they belonged in the real world somehow. I can't really explain it, but it just worked for me.

Now, Sonic on the other hand will never be realistic, but at least now he looks like the game character. I'll definitely go see it if only because I respect a studio who's willing to make such a huge investment for the sake of the fans. The movie is likely going to be craptastic, but then again I was kind of afraid that Ratchet & Clank would be and it was alright, although definitely aimed more at kids than adults. Jim Carrey will probably be the best part of the whole thing, let's be honest!

I'm glad they listened to the criticism and tried to make it better.

Because if my nephew or niece would have gotten a plush doll of one of those on Christmas, they'd probably be happier unwrapping a live rattlesnake.

Well, at least he looks like Sonic now. Movie will still most certainly be hot garbage, but at least it won't be because Sonic himself is nightmare fuel.

Still not sure this wasn't a giant publicity stunt, where the movie was final all along and a fake crappy trailer was made.

Seems counterproductive. At best, you have people assume you made other terrible choices and the movie will be bad in other ways (which they probably did, and it probably will).

At worst, you have prospective viewers who only saw the first awful trailer and that's all they see, so they are lost forever.

Hanlon's Razor applies: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."

I can't imagine a plot line that would make Sonic the Hedgehog interesting as a live action movie.

 ChargerIIC wrote:
I can't imagine a plot line that would make Sonic the Hedgehog interesting as a live action movie.

Sonic has cancer, and the only way he can afford to replenish his rings long enough to take care of his family is to cook and sell sell robometh.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:
I can't imagine a plot line that would make Sonic the Hedgehog interesting as a live action movie.

Sonic has cancer, and the only way he can afford to replenish his rings long enough to take care of his family is to cook and sell sell robometh.

Ok, I'm interested.

The scene where he samples his own product would put three rendering studios out of business.

Has there been a single video game property movie that was successful or warranted a watch let alone a rewatch?



Except House of the Dead, and that's solely because of nude Erica Durance

Tomb Raider (Angelina Jolie versions), first Mortal Kombat, first Resident Evil

Miles better!

Jim Carrey is ****ing hilarious and the improved Sonic looks great. I will not be seeing this at the Cinema but would be happy to pick it up on DVD along with Detective Pikachu - maybe as a "buy 2" offer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Just Tony wrote:
Has there been a single video game property movie that was successful or warranted a watch let alone a rewatch?

Except House of the Dead, and that's solely because of nude Erica Durance

Street Fighter II: THE ANIMATED MOVIE(!) and Mortal Kombat are the dogs bollocks!

Sonic looks less horrific, but the movie still looks like crap.

About the only thing I want to see is Jim Carrey as Eggman, because that's just on the face of it a brillaint casting decision. I just don't expect it to save the film.

 Just Tony wrote:
Has there been a single video game property movie that was successful or warranted a watch let alone a rewatch?

The first 30 minutes of Silent Hill are pretty great, imho. But then...

 Just Tony wrote:
Has there been a single video game property movie that was successful or warranted a watch let alone a rewatch?

Depends, does weed factor into the decision to rewatch it? if so, All game movies warrant a rewatch

I suppose Detective Pikachu counts? Kind of...

 Compel wrote:
I suppose Detective Pikachu counts? Kind of...

That's technically a comic book movie more than a game based movie though. Plus dead pool doing pikachus voice was a stroke of casting genius/insanity hell if they cast deadpool as sonic that might have made Jim's gurning bearable.

Pokemon in general might count. You could hardly call several decades of movies and shows to be unsuccessful. And Pokemon did start out as a game.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Pokemon in general might count. You could hardly call several decades of movies and shows to be unsuccessful. And Pokemon did start out as a game.

True but that version of the world and characters is based on a comic but I guess it's both really as they have now made a game as well.

SeanDrake wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Pokemon in general might count. You could hardly call several decades of movies and shows to be unsuccessful. And Pokemon did start out as a game.

True but that version of the world and characters is based on a comic but I guess it's both really as they have now made a game as well.

There is in fact a series of games called detective pikachu.


Other video game movies.

Rampage - fun. might not have been successful (unsure)
Angry Birds - Got a sequel

If we're talking about good video game based movies, the newer Tomb Raider movie (with Alicia Vikander) was pretty good. Also, Ratchet & Clank was better than it got credit for, but maybe I just feel that way because I'm a fan of the games.