I've held the opinion that the wider Sonic fanbase have been the victim of Stockholm Syndrome for years. They can be fiercely protective, even under the rawest deals. I've ended up hit with an onslaught of Sonic-themed avatars in the past for criticising Sega's actions. Apparently, I'm not a "true fan"/unfair/ not giving them "a chance" for expecting and wanting better.
The point that I'm making is pretty simple and valid and it's a point that honestly isn't remotely difficult to process. This franchise does not have an vetted track record of one thing pre-release turning out to be another thing upon release day (not in the pleasantly surprising sense, anyway, see Sonic 2006 and Rise of Lyric). A good amount of high-profile Sonic projects exist where people didn't think they were going to turn out all that good before release and, surprise surprise, the final release of said project wasn't all that good. If anyone wants to deny this and prove to me this reality where all of these high-profile Sonic projects that people had low expectations for instead turned out to be good upon release, then I'm all ears. You might want to note the quotes I responded to you with in my first reply that reflect the same points/suggestions of yours, but are three/five years out of date and are in reference to different Sonic projects also in pre-release at the time. If you're still supposedly confused on why people don't have faith in the film outside the design despite knowing little about said film, you can try and acknowledge this point if you want. If you instead want to play the victim card and complain that you're now supposedly being attacked for not being as negative about the movie as everyone else, that's your prerogative. But I would say that you don't really have any ground to stand on for that. I can't speak for other posters in this thread, but I haven't called people who are excited or hopeful for the film "mobs," "willfully ignorant," "childish," or decried them as not being '''''true fans.''''' Three of those remarks were yours, by the way. On a similar note, about your point about "intellectual honesty" and "mischaraterizations": You're free to re-read my previous post and show me where I said or even remotely implied you were a "Sonic movie apologist" or that "everything about the Sonic movie is shit."
Meanwhile, Crash Bandicoot is having none of this "wait and see" garbage. Can we stop indulging in this fallacy which states we cannot judge anything? At some point, it starts to come off as authoritarian policing of discenting opinions except way lamer and lacking balls.
I don't need to process your idea, dude. You quoted me and mischaracterized my position so you could use it as a counter-argument to YOUR OWN conclusion. I'm not taking an optimistic position here, I completely agree with you that some behave naively and are often optimistic in the face of contradictory evidence. Sonic doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. I ALSO think the Sonic Movie looks bad at the moment. Why in the world would you say that I'm supposedly confused on why people don't have faith in the film outside the design and with little known?? I FULLY acknowledge that everyone should have little faith at this point. I literally started my statements with saying I was going to play Devil's advocate. Even then, I acknowledged the film looks bad, and all evidence was that it walked and quacked like a "duck". My argument was that people were complaining about aspects of the film which were literally unknowable. Ergo, the dart example, you can't say Sonic getting hit with a dart "makes no sense", when you have no context as to what is occurring! It might be a lame joke, or some other bad movie idea, but you can't make a determination about logical inconsistency. Same goes for Robotnik's plot. I don't give a shit what words I used and how evil you purport them to be. You and I hold almost identical positions on this film. You are misunderstanding my words and using them as a counter-argument to yourself. Turn that on it's head however you like. Love how you end your fake soapboxing by claiming that I'm now misquoting you. Alright, so you don't think I'm an "apologist", please tell me what label you were invoking when you said: "Another "stop complaining, wait and see" cultured take to add to the pile." Intellectual dishonesty was too big a word for what your doing, I should have said "ignorant". You don't understand the nuance of my statements. So just stop. I'm done anyway.
It's actually just people disagreeing with each other. It happens. Some people refuse to judge the movie until it's out, some don't.
I don't need to wait and see, hollywood is terrible at making video game movie adaptions. I knew the movie is going to be crap before the leaks and trailer released and will still be crap even if they replace Sonic's design to be like that edit.
Saying something is "too early to judge" isn't an opinion. It's a passive aggressive attack meant to delegitimize an opinion. Now stating "I will wait until more information comes out before passing judgement" would be an opinion in that it isn't aimed at someone else's opinion. The difference is speaking about yourself vs a reaction/criticism aimed at someone else's opinion. And in the context of just about any fanbase, it reeks of the classic "someone attacked a property I liked ergo I will take it personally". Also known as a "Rand". And yes, I am quite aware the initial bit was meant to play the "Devil's Advocate", the later replies though makes me think that was a lie.
Yes, VectorCNC, by pointing out the comparison of your post and the quotes I added --we've seen this same rebuttal before that we're overreacting to properties of a pre-release Sonic project we don't know anything about-- I accused you of being an apologist and saying everything about the movie will be terrible. Again, how you got the above out of that post is beyond me. That you're still thinking there's a hidden motive behind that point, again I don't know what to tell you. There's nothing really vague behind what I was saying there. You can say you don't give a shit either way about mischaracterizations, evil words, etc. but I'll repeat once again that I'm not the one bringing those statements or accusations into the discussion in the first place. You are. So if you're going to hold me to task about using those terms, at least check the posts you are writing and have been writing first before you reply. I have to say no, you're still not recognizing the above rebuttal I and others have been responding to you for the past few pages now. The rest of the movie looking bad or Sonic in general not getting the benefit from the doubt for some time now isn't where disagreement with your "you're irrationally judging things we don't know the context of" statement lies. For the third time now, check the quotes I originally replied to you with, and check when they were made and what they were being made in response to. If anyone else needs specific examples then I can rattle some off: "Sunset Hill might be a tutorial stage", "it's only a (leaked) beta, the final game will be different", "Rise of Lyric will explain what Shadow's doing in the game", and so on. Anyone familiar with any of the aforementioned examples and the outcome of those events then can readily connect the dots from there and see how it applies to what I'm saying here. At this point I feel like I'm having to literally spell this subject out, letter-by-letter. If I have to make this anymore unambiguous than it already is, the message of my replies have been this: Yes, people aren't interested in withholding judgement towards unexplained details in the movie like Eggman not having his standard design, Sonic's piles of shoes, and Sonic's inconsistent speed among other things. Myself and others have collectively told you that reason why people aren't doing so at least seven-eight times by this point, rather than just doing so out of a state of mass hysteria that you're otherwise rationalizing as the case. You don't want the current line of discussion to continue? Then quit telling people to chill out about the movie using bullshit logic.
Every conversation on here follows the same path. Something I say is misinterpreted or taken out of context. No matter how succinct the language I can never guard against every possible interpretation or inference. Others chime in with even less understanding of the conversation, and it becomes a pile on to assert a greater narrative. Then my defence or clarification becomes interpreted as though I'm pushing my opinions on people, because I'm resisting hostility... I'm not willing to spend enough time in these forums to build an ilk, and the nonsense has made me jaded. Our fandom has the reputation it deserves. We have popularity contests as to who hates Sonic the most, who's unbridled hate is pure enough. I'll just step back as usual and watch the same odd-15 people piss on themselves and each other. You win Beltway.
....like I just said, you should probably be taking a hard look at the posts you've been writing yourself, before accusing others of being on the offensive or misinterpreting your own replies. Nobody has been talking about hatred popularity contests, pissing contents, or slamming the collective fandom as terrible up until this point. Nothing you just said even bothered to address anything I responded to you with before. But thanks a bunch for the condescending summation of everyone on the forum, though. I guess at the end of the day, we all just like being miserable. Gives us a chance to socialize. You really can call a spade a spade. Sonic fans are just the worst, amirite? :specialed: (Some final food for thought, though: The next time you present an argument and tell people they're too biased to retort against it... how do you think people are going to respond?)
Look I like you Vector I honestly do but you're not making much of a case here. The facts are that there is no track record of things looking shit and then turning out to be not-shit. Even outside of Sonic fandom...that seldom ever happens. This "wait and see" argument doesn't hold much water. If you want to say that you, personally, want to wait for more information then power to ya. But don't talk down for other people that don't share your level of patience. It's not a good look.
I appreciate the sentiment Aerosol, but I don't care about how I look (obviously). It's a matter of principal. I'm not asking anyone to reserve judgment, to "wait and see" on the movie as a whole or any constituent thereof in terms of its value. I'm on your side, I think it looks bad, but that's besides the point... There is a distinction here. People have the right to think however they want, but not all opinions are of the same value obviously. Many of you don't seem to think my opinion is of much value, but I can't fathom that anyone could actually disagree with what I'm actually saying if they grasp my point. Which is... ... ... claiming the film doesn't have an explanation for why something is the case, when you have no antecedent information on which to make that determination is an opinion of little value. How we feel about that aspect of the film is a separate argument. Whether the film deserves hope or hatred or faith, is a separate argument. It's like seeing Grandma has a black eye, and saying "there is no explanation for this!". We may not like the explanation, we may assume it came from some bad event, or something neutral, or whatever. I'm making no judgment, neither am I suspending a determination on how I feel about it. On purely rational terms, there is an explanation. That's all I'm saying. We shouldn't claim explanations don't exist when we only have the absence of evidence. If someone wants to make that claim, that's a claim of lesser value than those on which we do have evidence. This is entirely separate from reserving judgment on the film. The only reason I'm still talking about this nothing statement is that I believe this obvious fact was taken out of context and interpreted as though I hold some other position, which I can tell you, I do not hold. Case in point, I'm still being told that I'm making a "wait and see" argument. I'm not.
What am I waiting to see? The trailer's out and it looks pretty bad. Movie might be alright, but the trailer looks pretty bad. And typically a trailer isn't meant to look pretty bad - even in cases where it doesn't represent the full movie, the trailer doesn't usually come off worse. I'm such a "true" Sega fan, I've helped maintain the world's biggest Sega wiki for nearly 10 years. They've got a food stall in Akirabara that sells weird fish shaped things and edible Sega logos. I am Sega fan prime™.
Well really it's just a sub-conclusion drawn from the main one being that it doesn't look like a good film. Even if there's a good explanation for some things, the film still looks bad and most likely is bad.
No disagreement there. I totally agree. You would not know this from how I was quoted. The reason I've been fighting this tooth-and-nail is because I agree with you SO MUCH and I don't want to be lumped with people that are "reserving judgment", which is a sentiment I was repeatedly made to wear.
When did anyone claim this movie was going to be good? Its less of a cycle and more like just a downward arrow that started below ground and is now somewhere near the planet core.
It's a joke :P This movie has all signs pointing to it being a trainwreck and basically an embarrasment to Sega and Paramount. But I'll still pay to watch it just to see how this trainwreck begins and ends.
