Funny enough, when I saw the poster, I got this feeling I'd seen some fanart with a similar shape. Well... I had a couple of them. And the first one is by Arvalis, the artist behind Detective Pikachu's more realistic Pokémon.
This was my first thought when I saw it. It really does look like something he would've done. I want to be open-minded but goddamn that looks so fucking bad. This movie going to be a goddamn trainwreck and I cannot fucking wait. Now I just need to find a way to sneak some alcohol into the theater.
The best hope is that it does end up like Dragon Ball Evolution so SoJ can commission something like the Sonic OVA or Sonic Mania Adventures.
Yeah, I'm pretty much the same way. I don't like the design, at all, but the way I see it, it's just one of those bad movies a popular IP has to go through before (hopefully) getting something better. If all this stuff about SEGA not liking the design is true, then I feel really bad for them since numerous people are gonna pin the blame on them for this. Weren't they very vocal about the Boom designs straying too far away from the original design too? Same goes for the studio (I forgot their name) that's doing the animations. Didn't they work on Night of the Werehog and those other Unleashed shorts? Heck, doesn't Aaron have to advertise this on the official Sonic Twitter? Things are gonna be rough for him. Even I admit, I kind of wish SEGA could take action, but something tells me that's impossible. I loved Deadpool, and even liked the Fast & Furious movies (Haven't seen past 5 yet though), but this...oh boy. The amount of times this is gonna be brought up for jokes and what-not is gonna be a friggin' nightmare though...
Well then now that we have a right and proper shitshow I'll be awaiting the 100 car pileup after the initial trainwreck of a trailer from a safe distance.
I don't know what on God's green earth most of you expected. The minute they said this was going to be a live-action film you should had braced yourself for this. That aside, I absolutely cannot wait for the trailer for all of the wrong reasons. "What. The. Fuck Jesus we got off easy with those redesigns. Those are all just terrible. [...] And that cannot be Eggman up there. How. How the fuck is any of that Eggman. [...] This whole thing was just horrible from the get go." "This is horrible, why would anyone want any of these suggested ideas? At that point they might as well create a whole new IP..." TIME IS A GODDAMNED FLAT CIRCLE
Hindsight and time have a funny habit of making things look weird. Sonic Boom at least has a semblance of the characters in their designs compared to this. I can joke about Boom Sonic and his sports tape, they joked about it too, but when I see just the silhouette of this trailer Sonic, it's like staring at a midget abomination made for an indie horror movie. Not Sonic. If the face really is more "realistic" to be a genuine beady-eyed hedgehog face rather than his anime-style solid eye, we can at least say we finally got a "mainstream" interpretation of Mr. Needlemouse, because it simply won't be Sonic at that point.
Just to clarify--the first response I posted wasn't reacting to the final Boom designs, it was referring to the concept art for the Boom designs. Which included Sonic depictions like these: ....oh. Oh.
I don't know how the fuck you get the keys to a Sonic spin-off or movie like this and your first impulse is "let's make him look as unrecognizable as humanly possible." The original design was more recognizable to children in the 90s than Mickey Mouse and it passes Matt Groening's silhouette test with flying colors. Sega is fucking dumb for signing off on this, it's going to be another laughing stock for a franchise that constantly needs to reinvent itself. Like compare the Detective Pikachu movie to this. Yeah, Pikachu looks more "realistic," but it's still extremely recognizable. All they did was take the basic design and make it furry. If they took the same approach with that that they did here you'd end up with some fugly shit like this:
I seriously have to wonder how this type of thing even gets greenlit. I've got pretty low hopes for a movie that can't even get the design of the main character right. Guess I'll have to hope it becomes "So bad it's good" so that I can continue making fun of it years from now.
Oddly enough, a "furry" Sonic was experimented with during the development of Sonic 2006 (again because of the bizarre idea that fur=realism). Unlike this dumpster fire of a design, that version actually looked appealing because Sonic was just a little "fuzzier" than normal. You can still tell he has fur, but he's not an overgrown, shaggy mess. Sonic can actually look good with fur if it's done properly, but apparently Paramount would rather have him look "real" than look good. Which is totally stupid, because Sonic is not "real". He is not supposed to be "real." He is appealing because he isn't "real". When you force an animated character to be "hyper-realistic," you suck all of the character and appeal out of it (and this goes for the overall trend of making "realistic" versions of cartoony characters -- I'm looking at you, Detective Pikachu.) And why, why, why does a fictional character have to resemble "a real creature" in order to "integrate into the real world" in the first place? Spoiler alert: IT DOESN'T. Take the live-action Woody Woodpecker film for instance: He's clearly not a real woodpecker, but it still looks like he's in the tree. And more importantly, it immediately feels like the cartoon character has simply moved into the "real world", because Universal didn't try to warp the "real world" into some mutant abomination vaguely resembling the character. Paramount, take note. This is another thing that I cannot for the life of me understand. If Sega wants to make another questionable Sonic design decision, they have the complete right to do so. But if it isn't their idea, and they don't like third parties maiming poor Sonic beyond recognition, then for the love of God, SEGA, please protect your damn IP and stop letting them do it. Start acting like literally every other major company with a famous character/mascot and set some strict guidelines regarding how your characters can be portrayed. I have honestly never seen another company allow third parties such complete freedom to run amok with their corporate symbol. I mean, can you imagine if Disney let just anyone redesign Mickey Mouse with little input? IMO, it's disrespectful to the company, the original designers of the character, and to the fans. Why wouldn't you want to protect your own mascot?
What gets me is that they focused on the eye thing first and foremost in the brief interview. Not the gloves, the shoes, whatever the hell you want this mutant abomination to be, Paramount - but why make Sonic's eyes the primary hill you want to dig up from the old, ancient grave and then take a massive dump into all over again on a level never seen before? With the Boom concepts, SEGA stepped in because it basically stopped being Sonic and started being not-Crash Bandicoot, meaning there was no point to even calling it Sonic anymore. We're still judging a silhouette, but it's seriously resembling one of the freakish animal mascots and Sonic knockoffs of the late 90's, and yet they focused on the eyes for discussion despite hiding them. When SEGA is concerned about "the solution to the eye problem", Paramount, maybe you should've listened. Since it's their mascot and all. Or, you know, stopped while you were ahead and not let the art designers do whatever the hell they wanted. Or not made the movie.
We all know the truth... A new subset of Sonic fans will cling to this, thus fracturing the fandom even more... It's inevitable, no matter how terrible this is. What would really be the kicker, is if the tie-in game with this design is actually a good Sonic game. I just hope we get a Sonic fighting game with all the various redesigns as fighters in one day. XD
