Sonic the Hedgehog Movie Trailer #2
- Thread starter Yoshi178
- Start date
You know, the one with the trailer panned for the character design, set to gangster's paradise? Yeah, they just dropped a new trailer with the updated design.
And credit where it's due, that looks a lot better. I'm still definitely not the target audience, but my compliments to the redesign team all the same.
And credit where it's due, that looks a lot better. I'm still definitely not the target audience, but my compliments to the redesign team all the same.
I dunno. Sonic has improved, sure. But Robotnik still looks way off. Did they not re-CGI him too?
Even if I were a fan I would give this movie a pass just for the way Jim Carrey acts in the trailer alone. It's like he's playing this character as Ace Ventura but an evil scientist with robots. The last time I found Ace Ventura funny, or even tolerable, I was twelve at the absolute oldest.
Hey, the talking cartoon animal looks like a talking cartoon animal, and not some horrifying blue hogchild. It's a little different from the actual modern Sonic Design, but still instantly recognizable.
Pretty sure the movie's still gonna suck tho. None of the jokes landed for me. Watching Jim Carrey voraceously chew scenery might be entertaining tho.
Pretty sure the movie's still gonna suck tho. None of the jokes landed for me. Watching Jim Carrey voraceously chew scenery might be entertaining tho.
2 threads merged.
OT:
Those horrible teeth have been toned back, which is good. And he's wearing gloves now, so those horrible fingers are gone as well.
Also, no more Gangsta's Paradise.
OT:
Those horrible teeth have been toned back, which is good. And he's wearing gloves now, so those horrible fingers are gone as well.
Also, no more Gangsta's Paradise.
Can't please everyone. Honestly, I never cared for people who go way overboard on the I like it ironically, or "so bad it's good". Even "so bad it's good" can get boring or aggravating at times.CaitSeith said:
I think the movie will be just okay, but it should have been animated. I'd prefer 2D, but we all know that is not going to happen, so 3D would have been fine. Imagine this, but on the big screen:
Well that looks terrible, but at least Sonic isn't a horror movie monster now.
Honestly, they probably had this design in the movie the entire time and just made up the monster design for the trailer to get people talking.
Honestly, they probably had this design in the movie the entire time and just made up the monster design for the trailer to get people talking.
Why they don't just make these things animated when it would be 100 times better received and just as much cheaper to do in the bargain I have no idea. Whenever something that wasn't to begin with is made into live action it's always considered decent at best and absolutely horrible at worst and in either case nowhere near as good as the source material. Plus there's the fact that they can never and likely never will even with the absolute best of effects do anything in live action that animation 2D or 3D couldn't do better, and that's if it can be done in live action at all.CoCage said:
I think a few others had the same idea as me that this was the best marketing campaign that ever was. And here we are, with the pay off.
Millions of people are going to go see this. Me, as a Nintendo Fanboy growing up feel nothing for it. But there are so many people praising the new redesign that I feel this is going to be one of the most successful video game movies of all time just due to a crappy trailer a few months back.
Manipulation at its finest.
Millions of people are going to go see this. Me, as a Nintendo Fanboy growing up feel nothing for it. But there are so many people praising the new redesign that I feel this is going to be one of the most successful video game movies of all time just due to a crappy trailer a few months back.
Manipulation at its finest.
I give it a B-. Not an outstanding grade, but considering the last one was a solid F it does show a large amount of growth.
Granted I'm still not watching the movie because everything about it looks like it was designed for pre-teens in terms of humor levels and it feels like I was never the target audience.
Granted I'm still not watching the movie because everything about it looks like it was designed for pre-teens in terms of humor levels and it feels like I was never the target audience.
I raise you "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" and "Mary Poppins".Saelune said:
... Actually, I might fold on Mary Poppins. I remember being bored as a kid.
I raise you "Who Framed Roger Rabbit".
God, that was a good movie.
I call. "Dragonheart." Absolutely beautiful movie, amazing CGI for its day, still holds up now.ObsidianJones said:
We're going to need a ruling from Saelune. 'Cartoon characters' were specified here. Dragonheart be a bad ass dragon. Sans cartoonism.The Rogue Wolf said:
So, on one hand, Sonic looks much better, and I think the trailer is better overall.
On the other, I have to admit, if you asked me whether I'd be interested in the film if not for Sonic, the answer would almost certainly be no.
On the other, I have to admit, if you asked me whether I'd be interested in the film if not for Sonic, the answer would almost certainly be no.
2D or 3D, I think it would be better animated. Plus, why is this set on Earth? Clearly Green Hill exists in the movie's universe, so why not have a movie there?CoCage said:
Would've been far more interesting had this movie choosen for an actual (traditional) cartoon/live-action hydrid style. Instead were left with this Smurfs looking shit. Speaking of, this movie still looks awful.ObsidianJones said: