prfsnl_gmr wrote:
The movie. They’ve heard of the video games, but they’ve never played them.
Yes this is a good example. Making a movie based on a character usually has to be in parallel with its popularity climax. To clarify my point, imagine making a movie about ALF today. Yeah most people do not even remember him or if ever heard of him.
Going in the movie with your kids having no idea what they will see is equivalent to them liking Elsa from Frozen. Just saying, from my perspective , picking an older character way after its popularity heyday to make a multi-million movie on it is a little bit on the strange side of things. And the biggest question for me is, why now? CGI was great since like 2001/2 with LoTR , Spiderman, and the Marvel movies so that is not the excuse. Maybe someone finally saw a business opportunity and he was right.
Raging Justice wrote:The initial trailers were met with negative reactions. Sonic looked like something out of a nightmare and didn't look like the character from the games at all. After a lot of negative feedback, the studio redesigned him and ultimately tried to make a movie that fans of the games would be happy with, and it ended up being a big success. In fact, I think it destroyed that awful Birds of Prey movie at the box office
.
call me a conspiracy theorist, but I still think that was a publicity stunt and guerrilla advertising. I mean Gangster Paradise for a Sonic movie aimed at kids? really? I do not work in CGI but my understanding its very expensive to make those 3D models and takes a lot of time, they didn't have to recreate 1 scene they had to recreate the whole move! They also got it completely right in the "redraws" . Makes more sense that they botched a 2min trailer on purpose. From what I know about Hollywood, they would have released it as is and not risk spending more to correct it.
And I wouldn't compare Birds of Prey with Sonic, they are aimed at completely different audience. Its literally rated R which is a rarity now days