Sonic the Hedgehog Live-Action/CGI Movie Targeting 2020 Release Date

[Leo656]

"Some" as in, what... three?

[Wildcat]

Mortal Kombat was the best. Even though I’m in the minority I’d even include MK Annihilation. Might seem cheesy but it was game accurate. I think the first 2 Tomb Raider movies were ok too. Have not seen the newest one.

Don’t know about Resident Evil. They went in a different direction right? I saw the first but don’t really remember it.

As for this leak, it might be true but I’m not taking a twitter post as any real form of reference to any trailer. What the heck was that other thing? A prank?

[Leo656]

Mortal Kombat was indeed a generous exception. It wasn't classic cinema, but it was extremely faithful (as much as could be allowed within the baffling PG-13 rating) while still being enjoyable enough for people who weren't familiar with it.

Too bad that doesn't happen more often.

[Wildcat]

About the rating, that was Doug Walkers problem with the movie. That it didn’t go full blown violent when that’s what made the video games popular.

It’s funny that never occurred to me til he mentioned it. I guess it’s odd but there was still plenty of fighting. It just wasn’t gory.

I understand why they didn’t do that even though it was well known that kids played the games. I still like both very much.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Leo656

"Some" as in, what... three?

So?

And why do you exclude comic books from the list? If anything, they are as much pain the ass to bring to the screen as cartoons and video games.

[Leo656]

Because there's less restriction in bringing something to life that existed first as a static image (or mere words on a page if it's a novel) vs. something that's already been "brought to life" in another form. You have a lot more freedom in how you interpret it, even if it's the same basic character or story.

When adapting a cartoon or a video game, there are tons more expectations that factor in. You expect the characters to look/sound/behave a certain way, the visuals to look a certain way, the music to sound a certain way, etc. The creator is more "boxed in" from the start.

It's a subtle distinction but an important one. Granted, there's an altogether different set of difficulties in adapting a comic or a novel versus a cartoon, but it's a *little* bit more wide open.

As far as "So?", I'm simply of a mind that if an idea fails to launch 99 times out of 100, then it's fair to say that - in GENERAL - that idea doesn't work. If people want to keep trying to make video game or cartoon movies that "work" in live action, that's their business and their money, but we're still waiting for even a single one that's better than "Alright, I guess". Seems like a waste of time to me, but again, it's not my money. If I were a movie producer with $100 million dollars, I'd never bet it on a live-action remake of a cartoon or a video game, just based on the history. Or a sitcom, for that matter; those don't work as films, either. But that's another story.

I feel that things like cartoon shows and video games can be much more faithfully adapted through animated films or CGI. It's a lot less restrictive, for one thing, both from a ratings perspective as well as what you can do story and effects-wise. Things that would be patently absurd in live action are much more acceptable in a different context. A CGI Sonic movie? That could be terrific. A live-action one? Ehhhh... too many things can misfire. I've always felt that way; even as a kid, I never thought a live-action film was the right way to go.

Good question, though.

[Prowler]

Video games, in particular, are quite hard to make a movie adaptation of. Especially if we're talking about a live action movie adaptation of a video game series with a cartoony art style like Mario or Sonic.

In video games the plot/story and the action flows in a very different way than in a movie or tv show. Remember that the player is the one who is playing the adventure, so the pace at what you play a game or how good you fats you are at beating it varies between different people and everyone has their own experience. Imagine a game you like and think of its story for a moment. In the case of Zelda games, some people can take a long time to beat each dungeon/temple, and that's also part of the experience. there's manga adaptations of several Zelda games, including Ocarina of Time, ALttP and MM; and lemme tell you, they're rather different from the games. For one thing, Link actually talks in them. Second, he barely spends any time in the actual dungeons. There's way more dialogue and the action is more brief. Ocarina of Time's manga was pretty decent for what it was an was faithful enough for the most part, but clearly is not as good as the game itself.

As for comic books, well, they also have different pacing. You can actually read a comic book that's under 100 pages rather fast. It's quite different drawing a fight scene than animating it. That's why you have anime like One Piece with a very slow pace. Because Toei has been animating one chapter per episode for ages now. A lot of episodes include still shots, flashbacks and recaps. This way they can stretch an entire 22 minute or so episode based on an 18-20 page manga chapter.

Back to movies based on videogames, the 1st ever Mortal Kombat movie was surprisingly good. I guess it also helps the fact that MK originally had digitised graphics of real life actors. usually when you make a lie action version of a cartoonish like game it's always awkward to convince yourself that the human beings playing Mario, Link, Lara Croft Ryu, etc. are actually Mario, Link, Lara Croft or Ryu. Feels like you're watching people cosplay instead. In MK, it wasn't odd to see it in live action form.

Mario was mediocre, but I think it would have been better rated if it had been an original work by itself and had not attached itself to the Super Mario brand. Seriously, change the names of the main characters and the villains, and replace the bob-omb with a generic bomb or grenade... suddenly the movie doesn't look so bad, does it? It's just a really poorly done adaptation.

Street Fighter's movie was bad, but in a so bad it's kinda funny way. I kinda enjoyed it for what it was when I was a kid tbh. Sure it's bad but whatever. I got no hatred for it.

Besides MK, I think DOA's movie was pretty alright for what it was. granted I've never played DOA, so maybe my opinion doesn't hold much water, but I found it ok for what it was.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Prowler

Mario was mediocre, but I think it would have been better rated if it had been an original work by itself and had not attached itself to the Super Mario brand. Seriously, change the names of the main characters and the villains, and replace the bob-omb with a generic bomb or grenade... suddenly the movie doesn't look so bad, does it? It's just a really poorly done adaptation.

Besides MK, I think DOA's movie was pretty alright for what it was. granted I've never played DOA, so maybe my opinion doesn't hold much water, but I found it ok for what it was.

- The Mario movie still looks like it cost about $20 to make, so... Yes?

- "DOA: Dead or Alive" is actually a very good example. It is, at the same time, 1. EXACTLY what a live-action interpretation of DOA should be, faithful to the games down to almost the last detail, but also 2. A terrible, terrible movie, with nearly no redeeming value for anyone who isn't "balls deep" into DOA.

My wife and I have played all the DOAs and even the beach volleyball games, so I can say from that perspective, it's very entertaining and faithful as hell. Should it exist? I don't know. I do know that nobody could do DOA any "better" in live action; like "Speed Racer", it's "perfect" at translating its source material. Change anything at all about the movie, and it's not "DOA" anymore. BUT, also like Speed Racer, if you're not a huge fan of the material, then it's just a very pretty misfire, with nothing to justify the bizarre visual and stylistic choices outside of, "Well, that's what _____ looks like." As "just a movie", DOA is pretty lousy. But it's also exactly what it "should" be. So... what to do?

My favorite memory of DOA was actually Nash telling me that they all had food poisoning and it was a miserable experience, but that Jaime Pressley's ass made the situation tolerable. Good stuff.

They also shot in in like a week, if that tells you anything.

[Prowler]

Funny you mention the DOA movie was a bad expereince for everyone involved. Bob Hoskins said the same thing about Super Mario's movie. I don't think in that case food poisoning was involved.

I guess it's no wonder those movies turned out the way they did...

[Leo656]

I think the greatest lesson of all from the Super Mario Bros. movie, is that you can't make a fantasy or sci-fi picture on a non-existent budget. I mean, the directors were beyond incompetent and there was no script - well, there was a script when all the actors signed on, but there WASN'T a script anymore by the time the cameras rolled - so that project was just riddled with problems. But even a great script and a masterful director couldn't have saved the movie from the fact that they shot it for zero money.

See also: Superman IV. Terrible script, lousy direction. But ultimately, it might have at least been watchable if they'd spent ANY money at all making it.

Moral of the story: If you're trying to make a live-action fantasy or sci-fi pic, and you're reduced to checking the couch cushions for loose change along the way, maybe you're not the right one(s) to attempt the project.

[Prowler]

Strange that it had such a low budget considering it was made at a time where Mario and Nintendo were still at the height of their popularity. You'd think they'd have put more effort into it.

[Leo656]

I'd have to read about it again - I just watched a video about it a few weeks ago, but I watch lots of stuff so it "fell out" - but as I recall, Nintendo washed their hands of the project fairly early on. They pretty much caught "buyer's remorse" before the ink was even dry on the contracts when they realized that what they'd signed off on had never been done before, and had a spectacularly high chance of failure.

"Plausible deniability". "We as an entity had NO involvement in that abysmal Super Mario Bros. movie" was their official line from the start. They maybe possibly could have gotten involved and forced it to go in a different direction, but they weren't interested in that. They more or less immediately just wanted to disown the project and move on from it.

[Papenbrook]

Oh ... my ... God ...

Spoiler:

What the-

You have got to be kidding 'cause ... I don't even ...

[TurtleTitan97]

HE'S LITERALLY HOLDING A POPSICLE. THERE'S NOTHING TO BE UPSET ABOUT!!!

Honestly, you are such a drama queen. I can already imagine how much worse you'll react when they actually show the design.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

It definitely goes without saying that a Sonic CGI film (having seen the character in Ralph Breaks the Internet) would have been a better option. The idea of seeing a cartoon stylized hedgehog made into a live action film leaves me scratching my head. It'd be like doing a live-action take of DK, Kirby, Klonoa, or Pac-Man, just doesn't mesh well. I think Nintendo learned their lesson back in the 90s for trying that approach (though I understood why they did it since Mario's origins at the time were in question if we bring up stuff like the cartoons, Mario is Missing, etc.) and are instead trying again with a CG animated film coming soon.

I'm not overly loosing my sh*t over this like the user below but I'm also not going to give it the pass by believing it's okay to pull some Alvin and the Chipmunks, Yogi Bear, idea with a character that I'm passionate about. There's whiners and there's lemmings and then there's also.....people who've seen these types of films and know exactly what to expect.

Originally Posted by Papenbrook

Oh ... my ... God ...

Spoiler:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dzutj5eU0AARbFz.jpg:large

What the-

Not even Cubed was this annoying about the turtles and nostrils.

[Papenbrook]

I'm sorry .......

It's just ... why would he need to embarrass himself like that? What would he GAIN from posting that?!

[TurtleTitan97]

He's embarrassing himself....by posing....with ice cream?

That's f**king stupid, Pap.

[Leo656]

It's why we can't have a woman be President. They're too often ruled by emotion.

You think this kinda meltdown is bad? Imagine Kraken in charge of "the football." YIKES.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by TurtleTitan97

HE'S LITERALLY HOLDING A POPSICLE. THERE'S NOTHING TO BE UPSET ABOUT!!!

Honestly, you are such a drama queen. I can already imagine how much worse you'll react when they actually show the design.

New Sonichu Guy in the making?

[Kenwatanabesclone]

Sigh.

———