Sonic the Hedgehog | Paramount | Feb 14 2020 | Visionary Auteur Tim Miller to produce | See Sonic's new plastic surgery on page 58

[incognitoo]

18 hours ago, CoolioD1 said:

didn't they change alita's eyes after that first trailer or am i misremembering? they kinda had to say something after the reaction this trailer got with so many dislikes. ultimately i wouldn't be surprised if they just like, change the shade of blue.

Yes. They made 'em even bigger. In a way.

 

https://www.slashfilm.com/alita-battle-angel-eyes-fixed/

[dudalb]

10 hours ago, TimmyRiggins said:

 

Apparently, they reworked the Genie after the reception to the first Aladdin trailer. Au contraire, I'm seeing a lot of good reactions to a director being willing to listen to the fans and not blindly sticking with a direction that is wrong. 

So now the fans should tell the filmmakers how to make their movies?

If there was ever a recipe for disaster, thst is it.

The vast majority of fans know bumpkus about filmmaking.

But they are often the most dangerous thing in the world: Amateurs who think they are professionals.

I agree the Sonic design was horrendous, and that Parmount is probably right in changing it, but still, the idea of fans getting involved in the ac tual making of a movie sort of fills me with dismay.

Edited May 4, 2019 by dudalb

[Perfundle]

20 minutes ago, dudalb said:

So now the fans should tell the filmmakers how to make their movies?

If there was ever a recipe for disaster, thst is it.

The vast majority of fans know bumpkus about filmmaking.

But they are often the most dangerous thing in the world: Amateurs who think they are professionals.

I agree the Sonic design was horrendous, and that Parmount is probably right in changing it, but still, the idea of fans getting involved in the ac tual making of a movie sort of fills me with dismay.

Why do think other filmmakers will be so easily swayed by fans just because of this one example? In any case, filmmakers get feedback from the general audience all the time in the form of test screenings, and end up making all sorts of changes. it's just that we generally don't hear about it unless they tell us. It was only unusual in this instance because the director reacted publicly to the criticism, but as the Alita example shows, being swayed by popular opinion isn't that uncommon.

[MrGlass2]

With this design, the movie would have been a horrific bomb - period. And the controversy has probably hurt the potential box office of Sonic, even if the trailer did get a lot more publicity (and views) as a result.

 

Maybe it will be another Monster Trucks, or maybe the cost of changing the design will pay off in the long run. That is what Paramount will consider, not some pointless debate about "fanboys" and Internet. Since Sonic could still be the beginning of a Jim Carrey comeback, I do hope that it works out.

[The Futurist]

 

You ve studied Greek tragedy, William S., European philosophers and an Hollywood executive gives you an assignment :

 

Write us a Sonic movie.

stat.

 

 

[Eric Duncan]

 

[cax16]

There was literally hundreds of thousands of tweets saying how bad the trailer was and how awful the design was, Sonic looking horrible actually made another movie trend( that’s how badly received it was). If some of you think studios aren’t aware of this stuff I don’t know what to tell you. This isn’t about “listening to fanboys”, this is about doing what’s best for your movie to succeed. 

[The Futurist]

1 minute ago, cax16 said:

There was literally hundreds of thousands of tweets saying how bad the trailer was and how awful the design was, Sonic looking horrible actually made another movie trend( that’s how badly received it was). If some of you think studios aren’t aware of this stuff I don’t know what to tell you. This isn’t about “listening to fanboys”, this is about doing what’s best for your movie to succeed. 

The whole thing doesn't make any sense.

We ve been in the digital age for 25 years now regarding creatures (Jurassic Park) and I don't  see another example where a desigh was just plain awful.

Forget the fans feeling rightfully betrayed by this.

The design is absolutely godawful in every way, Sonic or not.

[cax16]

5 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

The whole thing doesn't make any sense.

We ve been in the digital age for 25 years now regarding creatures (Jurassic Park) and I don't  see another example where a desigh was just plain awful.

Forget the fans feeling rightfully betrayed by this.

The design is absolutely godawful in every way, Sonic or not.

I have no clue how this design was approved. I’m baffled. 

[WittyUsername]

1 hour ago, CoolEric258 said:

 

Chicken, Sonic, you’re just a little chicken. 

[tawasal]

This is a real fanboy rage that is the majority, if they didn't listen the movies box office would have suffered. This weren't just youtube incels having bad reaction to the designs. 

[incognitoo]

As for all this "how dare the effin manchilds raise their voices!" craze... You know, actually both sides are right.

 

With examples like Aladin, Alita and Sonic, I do not see anything wrong to go and tell the filmmakers that this isn't what I want to see on the screen. Of course, every filmmaker, every studio can always say "Eff you, that's our vision, this is how it's going to be! Deal witit!" - and that's totaly fine. They won't get my money, obviously, but kudos to them for going through. Now, I don't know about Aladin (not following the movie, as I have no interest in it) but with Alita the feedback lead to a superior design, making her actually look human. With Sonic... I think we all (well, at least most of us) can agree that the design of the speedy hedgehog is horrible and WILL hurt the movie if they don't do something about it. So getting this kind of heavy backlash is actually helpful, because the filmmakers do see that something is clearly not working here and that they better do something about it if they want their movie to have some success. In the end, these are digital characters, whose feelings cannot be hurt.

 

Then again... imagine a movie that has been made 30 years ago, would be made today instead. A big studio named Warner Bros. announces a new take on an iconic comic book (anti-)hero named Batman. Fans go batshit insane in their delight, since there has been no Batman movie in ages. Then they read further: Tim "Dark Wierdo" Burton as director? Michael "Beetlejuice" Keaton as Batman??? WHAT THE EFF! RAAAAAAAAAGEEEE!  Given the fact, that back then fans were in fact so outspoken against Burton and Keaton that this news made it indeed to some media outlets like MTV or cinema magazine (otherwise, I would have known nothing about this back then), this must have been quite the "silent" storm. Now imagine such a "silent" storm in the present internet day and tell me that Warner in fear of their future profits would choose to turn a blind eye to the fan protests.

 

I don't say that the above HAS to happen, but we all can surely imagine it COULD happen. Therefore I am very torn about giving in to fan protests. As a gamer, I know sometimes I have to have my voice get heard when a greedy publisher tries to fuck me and other customers over. When again a game is released unfinished, with missing content, but implemented monetisation mechanics and broken as hell, you simply have to raise your voice or nothing will change. But that is about games, and it's about a "finished" product. This here is about movies that aren't even finished (thank god, in Sonic's case), so I think this is a very delicate issue we are discussing here, that has to be assessed on a case to case basis. In Sonics case, I feel it's justified.

Edited May 4, 2019 by incognitoo

[Perfundle]

You don't need to go back 30 years for fan outrage involving a Batman movie casting decision; 12 years is enough, and with Ledger we don't need to imagine a silent storm because we saw it happen.

 

However, there's an enormous difference between controversial casting and controversial CGI. In the former case there's only the theoretical possibility that it won't work out, whereas with the latter the issues are there for everyone to see.

[dudalb]

17 hours ago, cax16 said:

I have no clue how this design was approved. I’m baffled. 

i agree. It should  not have taken a negative response for the producers or the studio execs to see the design of Sonic sucked.

Look, Paramount is right to change the design,and you need, ot a degree to listen to public reaction, (failure to make changes after BvS is a main cause of what happened with Justice League) I am just uneasy with the fans who think they should be able to dictate to a studio what they should do.

I  am a huge football (NFL) fan, and think I  can tell when a team is playing badly, but I don't think I am qualified to go iin there and coach a team.

blix

[stealthyfrog]

YongYea's really cashing in on the Sonic movie controversy.

All of these videos are exactly ten minutes, too. Hmm. Interesting.

[Zakiyyah6]

They can't change his height because of eye lines, I don't know why photoshoppers make the character shorter as if that has a chance in hell of happening. At best they will make tweaks to make him look a little less awful. 

[Perfundle]

3 hours ago, stealthyfrog said:

YongYea's really cashing in on the Sonic movie controversy.

The only video I'd seen of his were him going over what was wrong with Mass Effect Andromeda's facial animation, so it's amusing that I'm back on his channel to see him go over the exact same topic.

[robertman2]

5 hours ago, stealthyfrog said:

YongYea's really cashing in on the Sonic movie controversy.

All of these videos are exactly ten minutes, too. Hmm. Interesting.

well at least he isn't ranting about the usual BS youtubers cry about

[Rorschach]

 

 

[Porthos]

19 hours ago, incognitoo said:

Then again... imagine a movie that has been made 30 years ago, would be made today instead. A big studio named Warner Bros. announces a new take on an iconic comic book (anti-)hero named Batman. Fans go batshit insane in their delight, since there has been no Batman movie in ages. Then they read further: Tim "Dark Wierdo" Burton as director? Michael "Beetlejuice" Keaton as Batman??? WHAT THE EFF! RAAAAAAAAAGEEEE!  Given the fact, that back then fans were in fact so outspoken against Burton and Keaton that this news made it indeed to some media outlets like MTV or cinema magazine (otherwise, I would have known nothing about this back then), this must have been quite the "silent" storm. Now imagine such a "silent" storm in the present internet day and tell me that Warner in fear of their future profits would choose to turn a blind eye to the fan protests.

Quote

Keaton's casting caused a controversy among comic book fans,^[18] with 50,000 protest letters sent to Warner Bros. offices.^[16] Bob Kane, Sam Hamm and Michael Uslan also heavily questioned the casting.^[12] "Obviously there was a negative response from the comic book people. I think they thought we were going to make it like the 1960s TV series, and make it campy, because they thought of Michael Keaton from Mr. Mom and Night Shift and stuff like that."^[24] Keaton studied The Dark Knight Returns for inspiration.^[25]

I vividly remember the caterwauling  about "Mr. Mom" being Batman.

It was a big big deal way back then. (Wikipedia)

 

Then again, WB ignored the drama over Heath Ledger as well as the blowback over Ben Affleck, so I think they would have ignored that as well.

 

Also, don't kid yourself, 50,000 letters sent in protest was a LOT.  Following the 1/100 guideline (100 phone calls is about the same level of passion/feedback as one handwritten letter, more or less)  it'd be roughly equivalent to something like 5 million phone calls, and who knows how many social media posts.

Edited May 5, 2019 by Porthos