>>611 >What do people actually want out of film and TV adaptations of video games? "People", want and will eat garbage if it has the name of something they like on it. I don't really want these adaptations in the first place. It's like making a book to adapt a movie. You're going backwards in terms of mediums, taking away interactivity that's core to the experience that the story was originally made for. If I had to decide on something that's "acceptable", for an adaptation, it would be just simply a non-canon story set in the same world where characters are strongly grounded in their source material. It's been a long time since I've seen it, but I think the Devil May Cry anime series of one-shot stories did this decently enough. If you're talking about live action though, that is a sin, and anyone who wants live action adaptations should burn in the pits of Hell.

I want them to not exist, personally, as there's no such thing as a good live adaption, especially not of something as usually fantastic as video games. Maybe make an animated adaption and don't fill it with arbitrary popular voice actors and it won't make me vomit in disgust. I think normalfags just want catchphrases and good graphics, though.

>>622 >Vid Decided to look up people's reactions, and it seems like the only people even doing stupid shit like this are the literal and unironic oversized and above-age children trying to make themselves look cool on Titkok.

>but it changes significant aspects of the game's plot This is always going to happen, you can't fit a good plot into an hour and a half movie. That being said it was still about a tournament to protect earth from outworld, it was high energy and used relatively unknown actors for the roles (which video game movies should ALWAYS do). Mortal Kombat (the first one) will always be the best because the 'plot' of the game (and the characters) is so simplistic making it almost impossible to fuck up. You go in expecting cool fights and fun one liners and that's exactly what you get. Anything more complicated than 'earthlings fight warriors from other realms to keep earth from falling under their control' will ALWAYS get fucked up. Sure we might get the occasional fun movie like Resident Evil: Apocalypse that gave us Jill and S.T.A.R.S but generally if you like that movie (I do) it's because you didn't really care for RE games and don't care about the non-game add in stuff like Alice.

>>611 >What do people actually want Depends on what you mean by people. If people means the average movie-goer, who is probably not familiar with video games at all, they are looking for the usual. Easy to digest content with a simple but fun story, highs and lows, character growth, and a big bang of an ending where people live happy ever after. They see video game movies as adventure or comedy films because the average person associates video games with fun, whether the series is for teens or kids. So they don't expect endings that leave things unclear or endings with extreme horror elements. If by people you mean video game fans, they want something that contains the characters and elements that make a series enjoyable, but nothing that seeks to overwrite or contradict the personalities or rules of the world the game takes place in. It's easy to make movies based on books, because no reasonable fan expects the actors to look exactly like their mental vision, nor do they expect the castles and towns and buildings and whatnot to look exactly how they envisioned them while reading. But video game fans have already seen official visual depictions on how a town, a character, a creature is supposed to look or act. So if a director takes liberties and makes major changes to these things, it feels like a betrayal, the character becomes something new while wearing the nametag of a known icon. Since a lot of video game design choices are near impossible to do in real life, or look odd on real humans with human proportions, this makes live action movie adaptations very difficult to pull off. Taking this into consideration, people want movie adaptations of video games to honor the source material by sticking to the character and environmental designs and not overwriting existing stories with its plot. Which is why a number of people simply want a movie version of the plot of the first game in a series. But this just brings up the question: why make a movie in the first place with all these restrictions? Why not just make a remaster of the first game?

>>611 >Mortal Kombat is another "good" one, but it changes significant aspects of the game's plot. It changes what Sub-Zero and Scorpion are doing in the plot, but the main story is all there, and at least Sub-Zero and Scorpion's backstory is referenced, so they could have still used it and their real personalities in a sequel. I'm not too mad about it because frankly they needed to pick a story to focus on, and Liu Kang did make the most sense. Raiden, Sonya, and Johnny Cage can tie in easily to Liu Kang's story, and Kano relates to Sonya. Scorpion and Sub-Zero are kind of just doing their own thing that doesn't tie in terribly closely to any of the other main characters. Alluding to that, but then saying they were mind controlled to just work for the bad guy is probably one of the best ways to fit all the main characters into a single story. I do still contend that Mortal Kombat is the best video game movie, and one of the only ones that is actually a good movie, not to mention actually pretty fun for fans of the source material. Aside from Scorpion and Sub-Zero's story being totally glossed over, people also don't like that it isn't violent and bloody enough. I do think that complaint makes sense, since that's such a core selling point for the franchise, but then I watch the movie, and that complaint never enters my mind. Maybe it's because the amounts of blood in the game would look silly in a live action movie. The movie feels like it has the same tone as the games, in my opinion. They have a balance between silliness and seriousness. But I think the graphics in the game allow you to have that level of blood and not completely destroy the seriousness. If you had that same amount in live action, it would look a lot more silly. I agree with OP about enjoying the first Tomb Raider movie, but I could never really get into the games, so I can't judge it from a fan's perspective. But it was a pretty fun action/adventure movie. It stands well enough regardless of the source material. Super Mario Bros. is so bad it's good, which seems to be the common opinion now. "The Super Mario Bros. Movie," on the other hand, is awful, and I'm tired of pretending it's not. Clearly for political reasons, they had to change the main characters, especially Peach, to be totally unrecognizable. But by doing this, they also changed the plot, the relationships between the characters, and what the movie seems to think its own themes are. To be feminist, Peach isn't allowed to be a damsel in distress, so they had to swap her with Luigi. But that wasn't enough, Peach couldn't be Mario's sidekick, she had to be his mentor. But it's not like Obi-Wan where he's old and outclassed and needs to teach a student to be better than him, because then a man would be better than a woman, so we can't have that. So Peach is just plain better than Mario. The obstacle course that Mario fails at a zillion times in a montage? Peach did it on her first try. Well then why is Mario necessary at all? Why doesn't Peach just beat Bowser on her own? There is no plot reason, she just jobs to Bowser in a way that makes no sense for the character that was set up, so Mario can get the climax to himself. Then the movie has the audacity to pretend that it's about the relationship between brothers, even though the brothers were separated throughout the entire movie, so their relationship was barely actually shown or developed, all because women aren't allowed to be the damsel's in distress, only men are. But that's just the plot and themes. Obviously the characters are ruined too. The story in the original game is that Peach is a magical princess, the only one with the power to reverse Bowser's magic, so he had to kidnap her. So it's not even like she's "weak" in the original, since we know feminists would be offended by that. She could have been a fun magical girl. In the movie we got, there are cutaways with Luigi having light interactions with Bowser. Cutting to Peach interacting with Bowser obviously would have been better since they actually have interactions in the games, they actually have a relationship. Peach could have been kidnapped but still causing trouble for Bowser, he could have done that romantic angle they kept in the movie, and it would have made more sense since he would have actually been singing to Peach instead of Luigi. Maybe she could have interacted with Mario and Luigi through magic powers. Like she sends them letters in Mario 3, maybe they could have done that, but if they wanted to have them actually directly interact more, maybe the letters actually let them talk with each other live through magic or whatever. Then Mario and Luigi could have actually spent the movie together, they could have actually made the movie about their relationship as brothers. They could have bounced off each other and thus both actually had personalities, which they barely have in the actual movie they got. The music has already been shit on by everybody, so I suppose I don't need to get into that, but I just want to say how much I hate that Jack Black song Bowser does. But apparently it was a meme, so great, I guess we'll get a lot more of that next time. Also, I don't like how Donkey Kong was integrated into the story, I wish it had more to do with the original Donkey Kong game. But I suppose that's asking too much. They couldn't even make their own themes make sense, so once I start complaining about Mario deep lore, obviously I'm asking too much. I don't care personally about most other series that have had movie adaptations. Raul Julia gives a great performance in Street Fighter, though. That "it was Tuesday" line is a classic for a reason, and I find myself referencing it strangely often. The only other series I like that has movies/tv shows is Sonic the Hedgehog. Sonic 1 is absolute garbage. People act like Sonic 2 is better, but Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, and Robotnik all stop appearing for like 20 minutes so we can see a sassy fat black woman's wedding. But oh, I forgot, there is one more character from the games, the GUN Commander from Shadow the Hedgehog. Which, to be fair, is hilarious, but it's not enough. Once that shit is over and they move on to the final showdown, that's pretty entertaining, I suppose. But you have to sit through a lot of garbage to get to see Jim Carrey in the Death Egg Robot fighting Super Sonic. The Knuckles TV series approaches so bad it's good territory, but only because I'm a big enough fan of the source material that I get extra angry at things like the bad guy from Sonic '06, the most powerful entity in the entire Sonic franchise, appearing, but only in puppet form, fighting a big fat gay jew in a Knuckles costume. And that's after you already had to sit through an entire episode that's literally about Knuckles participating in a jewish ritual dinner. Sonic 3, however? Loved it. Maybe it's because I went in with such low expectations, but I was thoroughly entertained the whole time, and I thought they did a good job adapting the game, yet fitting it into the retarded continuity established by the previous movies and show. It's changed, simplified, but the core elements are all there. No Rouge and Amy is lame, but then I watched the movie, and the way it all played out, I didn't miss them. Tom and the other human characters are there, but they're essentially cameos, and Sonic's relationship with Tom is used to actually further the story's core themes, so I'm okay with that. Jim Carrey is playing himself, as he does, but he was the best part of the first two movies, and now he plays two characters. Gerald Robotnik has very little of the seriousness he does in the game, but it shows just enough to sell it, and then he's pretty funny throughout most of the rest of the movie. That dance scene goes on too damn long, but not enough to ruin the movie or anything. Jim Carrey playing off himself is mostly funny. Shadow is done very well, pretty much exactly what I would have wanted. His story is played straight and not altered significantly from the game, though I very much expected them to change it, since it's way too serious to fit the tones of the first two movies. But no, they did it right. The only simple changes I would have made would be using music from the game more (they at least use a little, and it is the song you'd want, but I wish they used more), and making it so the guy who played Sonic actually delivered properly the one line that was actually from the game. If I was writing the movie from scratch, then yeah, I would have done things quite differently. But honestly, making a sequel to the previous movies, and the Knuckles show, while also trying to adapt Sonic Adventure 2? They did a pretty damn good job. I haven't rewatched it yet, but I think it's my favorite video game movie by far, above even Mortal Kombat, which I do like quite a bit. Then the post-credits teaser for Sonic 4 looked like shit. So I'm ready to be disappointed. But I was ready for Sonic 3 to disappoint me, and that made me enjoy it more, so we'll see. Sonic also has tons of TV shows, and as I mentioned, Knuckles is the worst. Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog is alright for a funny show about physical gags, but it's no Looney Tunes, and doesn't hold a candle to contemporaries like Ren & Stimpy. That show about The Freedom Fighters might as well have not even been a Sonic show. It's really about Princess Sally and her gang fighting a guy who might as well have not been Robotnik. Hell, they did actually change his name from the original (Eggman). You could remove Sonic and Tails and most plots in the series would be pretty much unaffected, and if all you knew was the original games that were out when the show started, you'd have no idea it was even related. Sonic X sucks balls. I fucking hate Chris Thorndyke. Season 1 is so fucking boring, then Season 2 actually adapts two games with good stories, but it speeds through them. You'd think they'd try to add more story to flesh them out, since now they're telling them in a medium that focuses more on story. But no, they condense them. However, they do add a scene where a reporter goes to interview the soldier who shot Maria, who is now an old man haunted by things he did in the service. That was awesomely and hilariously dark, and precisely the type of thing I wanted them to add. Then it goes back to Chris Thorndyke being a poopy baby bitch. And later they do something that I guess is an extremely loose adaptation of Sonic Battle, but it's just a boring tournament arc, with much less story than the Game Boy Advance game has. But oddly, the relationship between Cream and Emerl, which is really built up only in this anime, and barely at all in the actual game, seems to be treated as canon in future game material, including Sonic Advance 3 (for as little story as that game has), and the current comic book series, which is supposed to be canon to the games. Sonic X Season 3 is awesome though. It's a blatant ripoff of Dragon Ball GT, with the characters needing to go in a rocket into space to get the seven MacGuffins in order to save the earth, and the main character even getting de-aged into being a child again. But that's exactly what I want out of Sonic adaptations. Sonic rips off Dragon Ball Z all the time, the main character turns into a goddamn Super Saiyan, so yeah, rip off Dragon Ball GT. That's fine. This is the only good Sonic cartoon. Except for Sonic Underground. That's the greatest cartoon of all time, and a part of all of our childhoods. And Sonic Boom is alright, I suppose. Most of it bores me, but there's an episode about Chris Chan, and it's amazing. Sonic Prime also gets kind of interesting in the last episode or two, but most of it is extremely boring and a waste of a good concept. The Donkey Kong Country cartoon was pretty awesome, too. DK has a beautiful voice, and some of those songs are actually gre

>>1454 TL;DR, plus ur gay, lmao. I jest.

>>1454 I might actually pirate Sonic 3 then and maybe even Sonic 2 just to skip to the end. I generally despise live action adaptations but Jim Carrey just sounds like such a good fit for Eggman that it could be genuinely entertaining. I still believe the first version of live action Sonic where he looked like an abomination was intentionally ugly to lower expectations for the movie as a whole before they brought out the real model for Sonic, since at the time vidya live action adaptations still had the worst reputation even with normalfags. I'm told this is unrealistic because they had to delay the movie to get the new model done, but if they had really already done a massive portion of the movie the shitty model, the amount of delay I had heard they had didn't feel like enough time to actually rectify that. I think they were either planning on the delay, or were behind anyways and used the bad model being "replaced" to cover it up. Is there any good reason to not skip the first Sonic movie if I plan on watching the other two? Was Jim Eggman even in that one? >Sonic Boom The only good thing besides a few random quips and a Chris-chan episode to come out of that is porn of Sticks the Badger and Marine the Raccoon. Those characters are original to Sonic Boom, right?

>>1457 Actually, never mind. Both Sticks and Marine appear elsewhere first. But I'm pretty sure Sticks porn didn't pick up until Sonic Boom made her more popular.

>>1457 >I might actually pirate Sonic 3 then and maybe even Sonic 2 just to skip to the end. I generally despise live action adaptations but Jim Carrey just sounds like such a good fit for Eggman that it could be genuinely entertaining. If their intention was to find a famous actor for the role from the beginning, Jim Carrey really was the best choice for the role. They couldn't have done any better than him. At times, I feel like he leaned into the wacky side of Eggman a bit too much, but that's either the director's fault or Jim Carrey's fault for trying to do his typical crazy dude act. It's also been awhile since I saw the movies (I saw all three of them once, in person in theaters) so that issue might not be as bad as I remember. But if you are interested in seeing how he is in the role, it is worth checking out the movies for that alone. Personally, I liked the first and second movies about the same, and really disliked the third one. I won't get into detail as to not spoil anything, but I didn't like how they handled Gerald Robotnik's character and how Eggman interacts with him. >I still believe the first version of live action Sonic where he looked like an abomination was intentionally ugly to lower expectations for the movie as a whole before they brought out the real model for Sonic I agree that this seems very likely. The team did have a lot of support and money for the project, considering it was a Sonic movie, so even if this was a risky move they could make it seem believable. And even if there wouldn't be any disciplinary action, who would want to be the employee who spoils everything by revealing it was all a ruse to create excitement about the movie and spread memes across the internet? >Is there any good reason to not skip the first Sonic movie if I plan on watching the other two? You'd be fine skipping the first movie. Besides explaining how Sonic got to Earth, the main ideas of the story are what you would expect from a kids movie. >Was Jim Eggman even in that one? Yes he is, he is the main villain. His goal, after getting a hold of one of Sonic's quills, is to capture him and do experiments on him in order to find out what gives him so much energy. At the end of the movie, he gets stranded on a mushroom planet, which explains how he becomes even more wild, eccentric, and insane in the following films. >Sticks the Badger Yeah, she's great, isn't she?

>>1457 >Is there any good reason to not skip the first Sonic movie if I plan on watching the other two? Was Jim Eggman even in that one? Yes, Jim Carrey is Robotnik in the first movie, but he becomes more and more like Eggman from the games as the series goes on. In the first one he barely physically resembles Robotnik in any way, and even the way he acts is more just Jim Carrey than Robotnik. It's basically an origin story for both him and Sonic, which the game doesn't have, so you can just act like it's a prequel, and for Robotnik, it sort of works. It's just before he got fat and went bald. Also the backstory is similar to the one used in the Archie comics (the later ones, after they erased most of the ridiculous stuff invented by Ken Penders), so maybe you could say it fits that way. Sonic 2 is very much a sequel to Sonic 1, so if you don't watch the first one, it's confusing why he has the relationship he does with these other human characters. It's nothing like what game Sonic, or any other adaptation of Sonic, would do. And some backstory elements exclusive to the movie are brought up in Sonic 2, as having Knuckles, and the backstory from the first movie, they need to delve into said backstory a little more. Also Sonic is literally from another planet in the movies, which is fucking retarded, and that extends to the other cartoon characters in the series. So uh... you gotta know that, I suppose. But if you accept that Sonic is an alien with adopted human parents, and Tails and Knuckles are then adopted as his brothers, then you can understand Sonic 3 just fine. Those elements are minimized, and the only bit that's actually important is that Sonic does care about Tom, which is fair enough, he does care about people, and you can act like Tom is just one of his many friends, except for the little bit at the beginning where Tom and his wife seem to act like these cartoon "aliens" are their children. After that you can just enjoy Sonic 3 like an actual Sonic movie. And oh, Robotnik's sidekick is an indian man named Stone, which bugs me because they don't make a single reference to Snivley, or Scratch, or Grounder, or Coconuts, or Grimer, or Sleet, or Dingo, or Bocoe, or Decoe, or Orbot, or Cubot, or Omlettes. But okay, if Robotnik can have that many different lackeys in different adaptations, I suppose I can tolerate one more. I just wish they threw in a line at least referencing Snivley, since he's exactly the same damn character. Just have Robotnik use it as a nickname, or at least call him a "snivley little worm" or something like that. Oh and Sonic has a pet dog but they don't call him Muttski, which bugs the hell out of me. I know I was just saying the show Muttski was from wasn't even as good as people say, but come on. Sonic already has a dog. Use the same name. They couldn't even bother doing a game reference and calling him Pele or something. Filthy casuals. >>1458 >Sticks the Badger and Marine the Raccoon. Those characters are original to Sonic Boom, right? Sticks is original to Sonic Boom, and actually only ever appeared in that continuity, though she was referenced in Sonic Frontiers, implying some version of her exists in main canon. Or rather, it implies you're not supposed to worry about it as hard as Sonic fans do, and just figure Sonic Boom is basically canon even though it contradicts main canon in many ways that are somewhat minor in the grand scheme of things but would bother autists like Sonic fans. Also Sticks crossed over with many other continuities in the comic book Sonic/Mega Man: Worlds Unite, which was mostly about the Archie Comics version of Sonic meeting characters from both Mega Man and Sonic Boom, which of course was a totally different continuity. And then basically every other Sega and Capcom franchise got pulled in as secondary characters. Sticks was the main Sonic Boom character since she is unique to that world. So okay, she technically appeared in Archie Sonic, but only because of a Sonic Boom crossover. Most importantly, since Archie Sonic also crossed over with Sonic Underground, this means Sticks is canon to Sonic Underground, the best version of Sonic, and the best cartoon, period. Marine is an extremely similar character that only appeared in Sonic Rush Adventure for DS, and has made a few comic book appearances here and there, including some more recent mentions. >>1464 >Likes Sonic 1 and 2 better than 3. Crazy. Yes, they did portray Gerald somewhat differently, but I'm okay with it. **He does still have the same underlying motivation, the same seriousness deep down, but when we see him he's already gone very crazy, so he gets to do Jim Carrey stuff. But then sometimes he gets serious for a moment, when it counts, and that satisfied me. Is it what I would have done if I had full creative control? No. But they had Jim Carrey in a kids' movie, so they're going to have him do watered down wacky Liar Liar stuff, maybe sometimes approaching a slightly lighter Cable Guy. They're not gonna have him go full Number 23. As for how Eggman interacts with him, again, I would have adapted the game more faithfully, but having the two characters actually interact with each other was done fairly well, keeping the idea of their relationship, but allowing for more Jim Carrey antics. The ideas from the game were still there, but altered to take advantage of Jim Carrey. Not what I would have done, but I can understand it, and I think it was done almost as well as it could have possibly been done, given the circumstances.

>>1454 Holy shit you're here too

>>1466 >Sticks is original to Sonic Boom Ah, the wiki is wrong then. It says her first appearance is "Sonic Comic #12", but then the link says that was in 2016, and Sonic Boom started in 2014. >>1470 Lmao. I also recognize him. He's the comic book autist right? His posts are always entertaining.

>>1475 >Ah, the wiki is wrong then. It says her first appearance is "Sonic Comic #12", but then the link says that was in 2016, and Sonic Boom started in 2014. The wiki must have a different page for Sticks (game canon) than for Sticks (Sonic Boom canon). Since they're different continuities, they'd technically be different characters. "Sonic Comic" is an obscure gag manga that the wiki treats as game canon, so it treats that chapter as game Sticks' first appearance, even though she's never actually appeared in a canon game, and has only been referenced in a single line in Frontiers. A similar instance exists for Amy and Charmy, who first appeared in non-canon manga from the early '90s, and were later adapted into the games. So if you go to Amy Rose's page, it will say she first appeared in Sonic CD, from 1993, but that's only for game Amy. Amy overall first appeared in Sonic the Hedgehog (Shogaku Ninensei) Chapter 1, from 1992, but that version of Amy has her own page, since she's technically a different character. Charmy didn't appear in a game until 1995, but he first appeared in that manga in 1992, but that's a different version of Charmy, with a different page. Vector and Mighty also first appeared in that manga, but only in art pages with no story, so I doubt the manga versions of those characters have their own wiki pages. And actually technically Vector first appeared in concept art for Sonic 1, but since that wasn't published until later, it doesn't count. Now if you wanna talk comic books, the Mega Man comic made by the same people who made the Sonic comic was pretty good. I liked that it was slowly adapting the games in order, but it went so slow that they barely got to Mega Man 4. They did original stories, and maybe a bit too much, but they were mostly okay. They made good use of the Mega Man various Robot Masters as supporting characters, with the guys from Mega Man 1 being good guys after, since they were built by Light, and the Mega Man 2 guys continuing to be Wily's supporters even after the events of that game. Then they started tying into things like Super Adventure Rockman and bringing in elements from Rockman World V, but didn't get anywhere close to adapting that game. And the Worlds Unite crossover heavily featured Mega Man X, with a prelude story arc which functioned as a prequel to X, which was pretty cool. Aside from having a bit too much original story and characters, I might also argue that Rock acted like a bit too much of a little bitch. But overall it was a pretty good adaptation. A lot better than the Ruby Spears cartoon. I suppose I gotta try reading the various Rockman manga, though. I know people say the Rockman X manga are good, but I have a soft spot for Rockman classic, and I like seeing that era's characters and story treated seriously. Rockman X is a bit melodramatic for me, and I don't think its story is really better than classic, even though people act like it is.

>>1466 >if Robotnik can have that many different lackeys in different adaptations, I suppose I can tolerate one more. I just wish they threw in a line at least referencing Snivley, since he's exactly the same damn character. Just have Robotnik use it as a nickname, or at least call him a "snivley little worm" or something like that. It really is a missed opportunity, because the two really are very similar. The writers for the movie probably thought something like: "If all the different games and shows give Robotnik/Eggman different sidekicks, and this is going to be a whole new movie series, we should give him a new assistant." Sadly, the likely reason Stone and Snivley are so similar is because you can really only go a few ways with Robotnik's lackeys, so that they enhance his character and not overshadow him. >Crazy. Yeah, it might seem a bit crazy, but I liked the self-contained story of the first movie. It had a clear point, and while it was very easy to follow, it got it across by the end. Family is important, you don't have to be the same as your friends to get along with them, etc. etc. The second movie had some cool moments with Tails and Knuckles. Of course, I should also mention that I don't think these two movies are super good, either. I just like them more than 3. >Yes, they did portray Gerald somewhat differently, but I'm okay with it. It is one of those situations where I can certainly understand why someone would enjoy the movie while I didn't. Overall, they deviated too much from the game's plot. The introduction of Shadow wasn't weak, but I feel like they could have done more with him between the beginning and end of the movie. He became like a violent Knuckles, trying to get the audience to laugh by having the answer to everything be destruction. It felt like they got the edgy Shadow from internet memes and used that as a base instead of canon Shadow from the source material. I understand that it is a kids movie, but I was physically cringing when the Robotniks started that whole dance number to get through the lasers. Yes, the two of them are supposed to be insane, and they aren't going to demonstrate this insanity by committing war crimes or anything. And I wouldn't be surprised if Jim Carrey wanted to do something interesting to get him through filming, as I heard rumors he didn't want to be in any movies beyond the second one. But it just felt too silly. The fight in the city between Sonic and Shadow was lackluster. The City Escape quote was shoehorned so badly into the script that I felt like Sonic was going to break the fourth wall and look at the audience to see if we were laughing. And, naturally, they had to shove an Akira Bike Slide Reference in there. All that promotion of Shadow and the motorbike for it to be used for 4 minutes. This could also be said for the other movies, but why is Sonic so useless? He has friends, support, he understands his powers better than ever. He should be literally running laps around anyone and anything. Of course he has to take some hits but the enemy should work for it by implementing anti-Sonic weaponry and strategy. The writers also forgot that Sonic is supposed to be cool and relaxed a vast majority of the time. Sure, something is bound to get him mad, and movies sometimes change character personalities a bit, but being cool is an essential part of Sonic's character. It has been awhile since I saw the movie, since I saw it when it came out. But I do believe I am remembering everything correctly. You also definitely know more about Sonic than I do.

>>1492 >Yeah, it might seem a bit crazy, but I liked the self-contained story of the first movie. That self-contained story had practically nothing to do with Sonic, though. It was just a generic half-CGI kids' movie, and I wouldn't say a particularly good one. Without the connection to Sonic, why would I care? The little connection it does have only makes me mad, since it's so different from the source material that it all feels like wasted opportunity to make an actual adaptation. >Overall, they deviated too much from the game's plot. But you just said you liked Sonic 1, which doesn't just deviate from plot (Sonic is an alien), but from the characters, which I think is the bigger crime (Sonic is a lonely child). Sonic 2 obviously takes enormous detours, what with the sassy fat black woman's wedding, but even with the bits they do adapt, they merge the Chaos Emeralds and the Master Emerald, Knuckles' people were genocided not by Chaos and their own hubris, but by Sonic's adopted mother, an owl, clearly because they only played the first game and saw vaguely owl-like figures in the background of Labyrinth Zone). Angel Island isn't a thing, and they couldn't even be bothered to have the underwater ruins be Lost World, Hydrocity, or Aquatic Ruin, as they're clearly Labyrinth Zone, again because they clearly only played the first game. >The City Escape quote was shoehorned badly Agreed. I do think it could have been delivered properly, but I don't think the actor even knew it was a quote. >The writers forgot that Sonic is supposed to be cool and relaxed a vast majority of the time This is my biggest problem with the whole series, but especially the first movie. Across all the other adaptations, Sonic generally acts like Sonic. This is the only one where he is a vastly different character. I do think it gets slightly better in each sequel, and by the third one, when he does lose his cool a bit, I think it's justified well enough, and ties in with Shadow's themes, so I'm okay with it. I think you're remembering everything correctly, I just think it's crazy to be mad about the movie with the fewest deviations from the source material, including the characters, and the fewest cringey modern kids' movie moments, but forgiving those transgressions in movies that had those problems in much higher quantities. Plus, I also don't give a single shit about the emotional arcs in Sonic 1 or 2, but at least Shadow's arc is actually retained in Sonic 3, and I do think that one is at least somewhat effective.