Sonic Live Action Movie Thread (Read OP for topic rules) "Trailer 2 on Page 482)

[Marco9966]

When can we see Sonic's design?

[Sonic Fan J]

I just wish the clips everyone was sharing for Schwartz were more than cheap jokes. If we're going to talk about replacing one actor for another due to the ability to better portray a greater range of personality with their voice alone then you have to post some examples to prove that. Admittedly, I'm not fond of Roger's Sonic outside of BOOM! (I'm a Jason Griffith fan myself when not just going with the Japanese voices), but if your going to tell me that Schwratz is better prove it. Say you like him all you want, but when the examples of his work are cheap jokes it just comes across as disingenuous.

That said, I don't like what I'm hearing so far, but that partly has to do with not seeing Sonic as a comedy series and having a very different interpretation of Leonardo than a joke making doofus (I always associated that with Mikey) so having nothing but jokes as examples of the actor's skill and range is not doing it for me. At least with Roger I've experienced him as Sonic, Siegfried from Soul Calibur, Ezio from Assassin's Creed, and Chris Redfield from RE. In fact, it's because of those three other roles that I never though Roger was a good fit for Sonic, and it had to do with his voice more than his acting skill. Now my problem with Schwartz, while I could see his voice working if he lowers his pitch just a smidgen, is that his delivery so far is very irritating to me. That could be the fault of the samples of his work I've been given or it could be the way he uses his voice when delivering those lines. Regardless, as of now, I just don't like the pick due to the examples of his voice acting that I've heard as they come across as insincere and flat to me.

On an aside,

Spoiler

Voice acting requires being able to capture everything with ones voice and imagination alone without being able to rely on your own body and environment to help you  better get into character. It's where I actually like something Hayao Miyazaki said once about how typically screen actors don't make good voice actors is because of that difference in skill sets. Of course conversely, a great voice actor would not necessarily be a good screen actor. In fact, I would be impressed if someone who started in voice acting could pull off a good screen acting performance in their first outing just because they're acting is in their voice alone and typically does not require all of the skills of a screen actor. Of course you have exceptions like Andy Serkis and his mocap acting who can do both, but that is far from the norm for cartoon design characters and providing the voices for them.  Then you also have stage acting which is an even more different beast yet and again is not necessarily compatible with screen or voice acting.

All three types of acting, screen, stage, and voice, require very different skill sets that do not necessarily lend themselves to the other fields. Being able to portray a large range of emotion and personality with your voice does not mean you can portray those emotions physically. Being great at subtle body language and ticks to show the depth of a character means little behind the microphone where you will never be seen. Further, neither of those skills will serve you well on stage if you are not good at performing by projection and in single takes, which in turn does not lend itself to the others where more subtle and patience are needed. That there is also the environment with which those actors work and whether or not they can work comfortably and to the best of their abilities in those different environments is also a major factor in whether or not anyone in any of these fields of acting can causally move back and forth between them. And even within these three classes of acting there are differing fields that aren't necessarily compatible. Just as an example, TV actors are not necessarily good movie actors and vice versa.

It is willful ignorance and the height of arrogance from my viewpoint to think that any one class of these three different types of acting is inherently better than another and that being one makes you better than any of the others in their respective fields. To an extent it's like saying a carpenter is a better architect than an architect because he actually builds the frame of the house and sees how it all comes together first hand. It's a totally different skill set and environment, even though they are both technically building houses. Perhaps that is a bit of an extreme example, but the differences between screen, stage, and voice acting are no less extreme and should be given the proper respect.

 

[PeterPancake]

I actually think Sonic being a little bit annoying is kinda the POINT. Remember,  he is going to start this movie needing a friend and being a juvenile delinquent/a trouble maker- Sonic being cocky and irritating at first could work REALLY WELL. I could easily see him playing Sonic as someone who starts off as an asshole and douche bag (juvenile delinquent) but learns that he can help people and that he can be a hero. I could see Sonic having little moments where he saves people like Clark Kent in MOS. Just to show the audience that despite him being a trouble maker, he has a good heart; he has potential to be a hero. 

 

I could see Sonic being very annoying at first but having a coming of age story and maturing a bit by the end of the movie.

[MadmanRB]

Ben Schwartz is a great choice in my opinion, being quite the fan of the Ducktales reboot I think he is great as Dewey.

And I am not knocking on Roger, I think Roger is good as Sonic but yeah he lacks emotional range as Sonic.

[Sonic Fan J]

12 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

I actually think Sonic being a little bit annoying is kinda the POINT. Remember,  he is going to start this movie needing a friend and being a juvenile delinquent/a trouble maker- Sonic being cocky and irritating at first could work REALLY WELL. I could easily see him playing Sonic as someone who starts off as an asshole and douche bag (juvenile delinquent) but learns that he can help people and that he can be a hero. I could see Sonic having little moments where he saves people like Clark Kent in MOS. Just to show the audience that despite him being a trouble maker, he has a good heart; he has potential to be a hero. 

 

I could see Sonic being very annoying at first but having a coming of age story and maturing a bit by the end of the movie.

I kind of hope not myself. Annoying protagonists typically kill a movie for me and would further drive me away form this film then I already am. It took Sam Witwicky three movies to finally grow on me in the Bayformers movies and of course then they just removed him without mention before supposedly making some really bad choices latter (I really can't say since 3 was the last Bayformers movie I watched). My concerns aside, even if starting annoying is their angle, I haven't really been exposed to any work of Schwartz's that makes me think he can play less comedian skewed take on the character that I could find a believable place for Sonic to end the movie on. Even now I have visions with everything wrapping up and Sonic telling an uncalled for joke that earns him groans and disapproving looks from everyone that he just smiles foolishly in response to making it seem like his lessons from the story only matter in more serious situations. That may be fine for some people, but it is painfully removed from the globetrotting adventurer whose cockiness stems from his recognition of his own abilities with his attitude being cheeky and playful and instead of just straight up corny comedian. I could easily be wrong and it is why I'm asking for better examples of Schwartz's work to ease my concerns, but as it stands right now, I am finding myself more apprehensive of Schwartz's Sonic than I was Rogers when he was first announced.

[MadmanRB]

yup

 

 

[Rabid-Coot]

4 hours ago, Strickerx5 said:

Honestly, it could just be me having my head in a hole with really only things like the MLP or TTG movies to go off of in this department but I had thought that Hollywood was past replacing official character voices with celebrities. Maybe it's still a live-action thing? 

Those two are in a different category as movies, they're more of a higher budget feature length tv episode. I couldn't find a MLP budget but TTG reportedly cost $10 million.

[STK77]

Why are people even arguing about Schwartz being casted as Sonic? They're not going to cast Roger just because fans are complaining about it. Roger has been chosen for the games; that never guaranteed he'd get the role in a movie. 

[Emerald Chaos]

But Roger voiced Sonic in Wreck-It Ralph. So there's already precedent for him providing the voice for Sonic in a Hollywood movie

[PeterPancake]

12 minutes ago, Emerald Chaos said:

But Roger voiced Sonic in Wreck-It Ralph. So there's already precedent for him providing the voice for Sonic in a Hollywood movie

Which he recorded in one day for a 15 second cameo appearance. That is completely different from an adaptation of the Sonic franchise with Sonic as the lead character

[Emerald Chaos]

It's odd for them to change their priorities for something like this, however. Lately they seem to have been stressing consistency/recognisability of the brand. Changing his voice actor for the movie seems to run counter to that. And if they plan to replace Roger with the new actor in the games, then surely they realize that introducing a new Sonic voice through this spin off movie is a pretty risky move.

Or maybe they don't. It's SEGA after all.

[PeterPancake]

Sega isn't making the movie... Lizuka is serving as a creative supervisor but most of these decisions are being made by the director and the production crew. You can't expect Paramount to run things the same way Sega has 

[Emerald Chaos]

Surely they'd have some say in who voices Sonic. It's their franchise, at the end of the day

[Razule]

47 minutes ago, Lahsuwu said:

Why are people even arguing about Schwartz being casted as Sonic? They're not going to cast Roger just because fans are complaining about it. Roger has been chosen for the games; that never guaranteed he'd get the role in a movie. 

Shutting down arguments by telling people their opinions don't mean anything isn't exactly an argument in itself.

[STK77]

Just now, Razule said:

Shutting down arguments by telling people their opinions don't mean anything isn't exactly good form.

I'm not telling anyone their opinion doesn't mean anything. I'm saying that a choice has been made by the producers and nothing we say is going to change it, so complaining about it is pointless. 

[PeterPancake]

23 minutes ago, Emerald Chaos said:

Surely they'd have some say in who voices Sonic. It's their franchise, at the end of the day

Correct but Sega has so far, given the crew creative liberty to make Sonic the way they want to make him. Which is smart, because SEGA has little experience with the Industry as a whole and people like Moretz have been making films for years; they will know what appeals to a wider audience. And Sega wants to turn Sonic into a multi-media icon and Paramount sees Sonic as a potential replacement for Transformers.

Roger I knew was never going to voice Sonic because of the aforementioned reasons. If the movie is successful,  I could easily see Sega trying to capitalize on It's success and changing elements from other Sonic media to be more in line with movie Sonic. Kinda like what Hasbro did 

[Sonic Fan J]

6 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

And Sega wants to turn Sonic into a multi-media icon and Paramount sees Sonic as a potential replacement for Transformers.

If the movie is successful,  I could easily see Sega trying to capitalize on It's success and changing elements from other Sonic media to be more in line with movie Sonic. Kinda like what Hasbro did 

As a fan of the franchise this is one of my biggest concerns actually. I know it's arguably BOOM! Syndrome all over again, but as I have not liked where the franchise has been going post Unleashed and what I've been seeing about the movie it really does feel like a threat again any trace of hope I have left for the franchise to find it's way back to Sonic being a globetrotting adventurer who lives life by his own rules. The superhero, comedian, or hybrid of the two as well as the rebellion member have never appealed to me and the possibility that success of this movie could trap the franchise in that imagery is horribly disheartening. While I not wish for the movie to fail, I would personally prefer an outcome that makes SEGA the money they want without compromising the franchise more than they already have.

[MetalSkulkBane]

I have only one question about Ben Schwartz

Why he's obsessed with playing blue cocky anthropomorphic animal with age vaguely between kid and a teen? At least no multi-colors brothers this time.

[Marco9966]

6 minutes ago, MetalSkulkBane said:

I have only one question about Ben Schwartz

Why he's obsessed with playing blue cocky anthropomorphic animal with age vaguely between kid and a teen? At least no multi-colors brothers this time.

Luck?

[PeterPancake]

13 minutes ago, Sonic Fan J said:

As a fan of the franchise this is one of my biggest concerns actually. I know it's arguably BOOM! Syndrome all over again, but as I have not liked where the franchise has been going post Unleashed and what I've been seeing about the movie it really does feel like a threat again any trace of hope I have left for the franchise to find it's way back to Sonic being a globetrotting adventurer who lives life by his own rules. The superhero, comedian, or hybrid of the two as well as the rebellion member have never appealed to me and the possibility that success of this movie could trap the franchise in that imagery is horribly disheartening. While I not wish for the movie to fail, I would personally prefer an outcome that makes SEGA the money they want without compromising the franchise more than they already have.

It will be a welcome change from the Pontaff stand-up comedian Sonic in my opinion. Sonic going back to being edgy and a bit of a "bad boy" is something I really like and I have no problem with movie Sonic rubbing off on other versions if that's what we get. From what we're hearing about movie Sonic, he could easily still be a globe trotting adventurer except they lean into the "carefree", free spirit part of him that has always been there. I.e Sonic starting off as someone who just doesn't give a shit about anything and just wants to do things his own way. Until, of course, Robotnik rises and Sonic realizes that he's the only one who can stop him. It's a beautiful arc that is still true to the core of who Sonic is 

Btw, Michael Pitt is my choice for Shadow in a potential sequel.

Check out this clip

I could EASILY imagine this being Shadow 

[Sonic Fan J]

2 minutes ago, PeterPancake said:

It will be a welcome change from the Pontaff stand-up comedian Sonic in my opinion. Sonic going back to being edgy and a bit of a "bad boy" is something I really like and I have no problem with movie Sonic rubbing off on other versions if that's what we get. From what we're hearing about movie Sonic, he could easily still be a globe trotting adventurer except they lean into the "carefree", free spirit part of him that has always been there. I.e Sonic starting off as someone who just doesn't give a shit about anything and just wants to do things his own way. Until, of course, Robotnik rises and Sonic realizes that he's the only one who can stop him. It's a beautiful arc that is still true to the core of who Sonic is 

While I'm all for getting away from the Pontaff stand-up comedian Sonic myself, if we're going to truly go back to how Sonic was supposed to be, a cheeky and impertinent character who can't stand injustice and dislikes seeing people cry all while being a globetrotting adventurer who lives life by his own rules, then Sonic has to make the decision to get there on his own. If the movie is truly going to take Sonic back to that image then it has to be Sonic's own agency that gets him there and not Tom the Cop. It's one thing for Sonic to consider Tom's actions, but for Tom to play his Uncle Ben it would just feel like it is stripping Sonic of his personal agency as a character. We'll see how it goes from here though, and hopefully my concerns can be limited to just how he is going to appear.

[Red Hot Jack]

I'm seeing more anti-Roger comments than anti-Ben/Hollywood rants tbh.

[PeterPancake]

Two new actors added to the cast 

https://www.google.com/amp/collider.com/sonic-the-hedgehog-movie-adam-pally-neal-mcdonough/amp/

 

Adam Pally and Neal McDonough. Adam will play a cop but I wonder who this guy could be playing 

[Ayliffe]

Also there's a brief synopsis for the film in that article!

Quote

Marsden will play a small-town cop from South Dakota who ends up going on a road trip to San Francisco with Sonic the Hedgehog as they race against the evil Dr. Robotnik (Carrey) to recover Sonic’s rings. Pally will play a fellow cop, while McDonough’s role remains under wraps.

It sounds, uh.... interesting, let's put it that way.

[Graystripe2000]

That plot summary contradicts what was said earlier about it. 

https://www.vancouverislandfreedaily.com/news/paramount-budgets-7m-for-sonic-the-hedgehog-movie-shoot-in-hero-town-ladysmith/

http://www.tssznews.com/2018/06/09/paramount-ceo-characterizes-sonic-in-movie-as-delinquent/

Something isn’t right here.