Talk:Awful Movies Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Sonic's new design was leaked
I mean, its better than what we saw before. But a few things about his design looks off..
but still this design is million times better than the previous one.
As much as it mostly matches the Sonic we're all familiar with... it does kind of look a bit off in some places? (the face that Sonic is making)
Especially in that second shot with him facing forward.
Plus Sonic’s arms aren’t tan (that same problem I have with Boom Sonic’s design).
Mostly matched, but with Sonic Boom legs :/ I might not be as bad we think.
Fixed design or not, the movie still looks like bland generic focus tested bordedom.
Exactly. And the movie will still be a slog regardless.
I already know.
While people were mocking the original design they completely ignored that the movie looks like every typical "fictional creature arrives in our world some random normal guy finds the creature" story that has been done to death, no different from the live action Smurfs or Chipmunk movies.
No amount of cgi redesign can fix that.
I already know this movie is gonna be another cliche hybrid movie.
Also this movie still have extremely poor grasp of source material, just like the two smurfs movies.
For example, Sonic's fur can electrocute you, rings are portals that can teleport you to other locations, and Sonic can apparently create shockwaves while running.
Also his sidekick Tails is nowhere to be seen.
Only Sonic and Eggman come from the games, in fact.
I already know this is cannot save the movie but at least there's no creepy looking sonic with human teeth.
More of mediocre compared to his original design on his first trailer imo.
This movie is from Paramount Pictures, not Sega. ￼
Yeah, but SEGA is included in the production companies while Paramount Pictures distributed it.
But the designers are American. Not the original designers.
Sega's involvement doesn't go much beyond licensing the character.
and it's not. Still better than the creepy ass design.
At least it won't haunt your dreams for the rest of your life.
I don't know about that TNT.
The design still sucks!!! THEY BETRAYED US ALL!!!
Honestly, I think it's nearly worse than before.
Get out here. Don't let me post the original design.
He now looks like a puppet rather than hedgehog.
Okay, maybe the second image kinda looks like he's attached with strings, making him like a puppet. I see your point Sticky. But not the first image.
No and no. His design more resemblence his original counterpart.
Let's not start a flame war, here. It's just my opinion
I'm not that stupid to start a flame war. Don't worry.
I didn't say you were.
I think it looks great, I like how it sticks to the game design whilst doing something different at the same time (the original design did that too, but it failed badly). The only nitpick for me is the blue arms, which should have been changed too.
You know what. I don’t think we should worry about it. If that fails than it’s on Paramount. Not the franchise itself.
It's non-canon to the actual franchise, is it?
The redesign is really good and I was glad that the director has acknowledged about the original design and take it easy for the animators by simply delayed to changed from 2019 November to 2020 February, except the movie could not be saved for making another version of Yogi Bear/Smurfs/Garfield live-action.
AHHHHH- (gets shot by knock-out dart)
AW COME ON
OK pal, I want answers! Basically it looks like I'm gonna have to save your planet.
*crappy rap music plays*
Ho ho, is that all you got?
No BuT Thank YOU fOr AskIng
Sonic: Uh oh.
Doctor "Eggman" Ivo Robotnik: What ever this creature is... Our job is to secured it, neutralize it, and see what it takes. (Taste at Sonic quills until been electric shock)
We need Chao's Offical-PASDB.
The redesign is a thousand miles better than the original. Still. there are some problems. The shoes and gloves still look a bit off and need some work. Plus, just like the infamous Sonic Boom redesign, Sonic arms are once again blue instead of tan. Overall, while the design is better, the movie still has a lot of problems.
And looks like any other bad live-action adaptation.
The shoes and gloves thing seems more like a nitpick, I'm just glad he at least has gloves.
Norm of the North: Keys to the Kingdom
Funny how this isn’t on the Wiki yet, speaking of that film, I found an ad for it promoted by Splash Entertainment founder Mike Young himself on his “Superted” fanpage. I responded with something and then, he replied with this:
“These were two forty five minute films made as a DVD type release for young children in the 6-10 demographic, not forty year old guys who live in their mothers basement.”
the last bit though, is the laughing riot. He’s using the “It’s made for Kids” excuse and defending himself from the hate the Norm movies have gotten.
such a shame really, as shows he created like SuperTed appealed to all audiences.
Can you give me a link or a screenshot?
Now we have it. I noticed he wrote "forty five minute" while he should have wrote "minutes". He also wrote "mothers" without the apostrophe.
I just want to say: this whole "it's made for kids" excuse from Mike Young (the founder of Splash Entertainment) is driving me bonkers.
HOW DARE HE!! Were pretty much adults and teenagers!
I think what he's saying is that the movie is SUPPOSED to be bad.
Doesn't change that it's bad.
And doesn't explain that he's making it for kids fully knowing that it's a stupid movie series.
I don't see why young age should excuse gross humor, since I was a child I despised it. And you surely aren't 40, nor we are living in a basement, my house for example only has a cellar.
Seems nice. I'm also not mad about the Bratz: The Movie page being deleted, If the pointers are undetailed, generic or makes no sense. I can respect that
That's the spirit. It just happens that some negatively received movies are easy to attack but hard to strike.
When i saw Splash Entertainment's other movies and TV shows, they looked like shameless garbage that no one wants to see. I'm tired of Mike Young using the "it's made for kids" excuse. I don't think any of Splash Entertainment's movies or TV shows are good. It's like everytime they try to make a good TV show, it ends up being garbage. Children who are addicted to immature humor may want to end up in a childish place. But even without any of the movies or TV shows' problems, Splash Entertainment does not deserve any credit.
Mike Young is only using the "it's for kids" excuse to avoid taking criticism
I really don't care if he's using the "it's made for kids" excuse. It's just driving me bonkers.
To think Splash once made a TV series of Clifford.
I just made the page for the movie now, and included that quote he said.
Mike Young has pretty much just implied that children don't deserve smart humor.
Bah, gross humor attracts children and so they keep on making this type of movies. Preposterous.
Yes, what they don't understand is that children actually like intelligent humor like Gumball, yet they take the too-easy-to-count-as-a-success way out and make animated slop filled to the brim with gross-out humor just to gross out as much money from their mothers' wallets as possible. And there's barely any love or respect behind it. At least the reason we have Cars is because it was someone's passion.
Cars easily attract children but as an easy way to earn money they are nowhere near as bad as gross-out humor, they are pretty cool.
Some kids do deserve smart humor, while others (in 1st grade) might watch movies with tedious, immature humor.
Mike Young Is The Equivalent Of Kirk Cameron
I'm just gonna say this - The "It's made for kids" defence has been used so many times on TV shows and films like this everywhere, that's it's just become tedious and boring.
To anyone still using it while defending such productions - JUST STOP IT.
Easy, they don't read our wiki anyway.
Well, we did have FuturisticHub on TTVS and we have way too many YouTubers finding their own pages on my wiki.
Really? I bet that is very annoying. But those are youtubers, they are a different breed, internet dwellers. This guy is a businessman, he probably doesn't spend enough time on the internet to discover the page.
Those youtubers probably searched themselves on Google, also; I doubt this guy does the same.
Here is Mike Young's precious reply he sent me.
Actually, this is Facebook. I can tell by the layout.
Uhm, I will never get to learn these social networks properly.
What did you say to provoke a response like that, exactly?
Basically, I made a little joke about Mike Young's own (and better) creation "SuperTed" (an old animated series) by saying "I hope SuperTed can save us from this awful movie!" (The Norm ad was on a SuperTed fan page created by Young.)
Uh, maybe you should have been more diplomatic regardless of the movie's quality. He should have appreciated you mentioned one of his creations though.
Well, it’s a shame as SuperTed was a great cartoon (especially since it’s animation looked like an American cartoon, but was fully animated in the UK) and the way Mike Young went now with a twerking polar bear is just sad.
Of course but if you'd wrote in a different way maybe he wouldn't have replied so harshly, or at least there wouldn't have been no doubt about his bad behaviour if your post wouldn't have been kinda provocative like it is.
I mean, regardless of the movie's quality, your post wasn't fair criticism. If it were, then the guy couldn't have been forgiven for what he replied. Now that I know what you wrote that made him reply like that, I kinda think the guy is somewhat excused, again regardless of the movie's quality.
Maybe that could have been true, but if I just removed “Awful”, then it could have maybe been a little bit better.
That wouldn't fix it either. Your comment was not criticism at all, it was purely a hate comment and not a very tasteful one.
Jesus, reminds me so much of Kirk Cameron calling his haters "atheists."
He's always making movies for kids so shameless that no one wants to see them anymore. He thinks the haters are "phonys," and the likers "the bomb."
There is even a 2nd sequel which is WAY worse than this.
Norm will never die, will he?
No, a 4th movie is coming and I'm sure there will be a Norm 5. A whole saga and a Crappy Cinematic Universe.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a Norm 6 coming.
Same here, seeing as Alpha & Omega managed to get a whopping 7 sequels, the later ones from Dino Digs onward of which were also produced by Splash Entertainment.
Mr. Young, you really do have a bad track record.
Someone can ban "Marvelrules" please?
They should’ve casted a white skinned redhead as Ariel in The Little Mermaid remake
So she can look more accurate to the 1989 animated film
Nah, it's unlikely they'll ever cast that type of actor, because they want to be more diverse. If anything, an Asian would be a better fit than Halle Bailey.
Basically if Hollywood were to say "WE wANT tO bE MOrE DiVeRse IN OUR rEMaKes", I would say, "Well then use an Asian if you want to be diverse".
Make "Disney. Pls cast an Asian as Ariel." A petition.
In other words, they use movies as a mere means of promoting diversity, something which doesn't have anything to do with entertainment and is already an inconsistent objective by default since there already is a lot of movies with actors of colour and other races.
They are just doing this with new versions of famous movies so they can get PR points and shock the mainstream viewers.
Also, think about it. For these people the actor is not as important as the race he belongs to. They want a diverse race first, then they look for a person of said race. The single individual doesn't exist for them, only races.
This reasoning by category of people is just the opposite of racism and just as bad and harmful to everyone.
What is your opinion on people defending Halle Bailey as Ariel and calling haters of Halle Bailey’s casting Ariel racist?
It's ridiculous. People say that the people against the casting are racists even though blackwashing is also racist.
Those people use the strawman fallacy to counter the criticism against the casting.
They should've casted an Asian as Ariel in The Little Mermaid remake
So that it would be way better lel.
...I don't get it.
THEY SHOULD CAST AN ASIAN!
Is this a joke about how they blackwashed Ariel for no reason?
Ariel looks odd-ball for some reason. I'm seriously not looking forward for the animated creatures. :(
What they did with Ariel's casting was just a forced way of being diverse, if you want to do that, just make a new character instead.
What's worse is if they wanted it to be diverse, they wouldn't need to do anything. Not only are redhead characters diverse, but the story is from Danish origins.
Yes, but don't you now that redheads and Danish are white people?
Oh yes, and it can't be diverse if there are white people.
We should mention this in the character race changes page, even if I have mixed feeling about that page.
Where is the Character Race Change page?
Hollywood and Disney nowadays have lost their minds. I don't mind having black characters, but don't take a well-known white character and blackwash him/her, it's just wrong (if you did it the other way around where you whitewash a black character it's just as bad).
I don't get why some people are calling the people against this casting "racists", because blackwashing/whitewashing is also racist in general as you are taking a character of a certain race and changing it.
They call them racist because they are closed-minded SJWs.
Did you also know that Mulan is getting a live-action reboot?