Gallery: Sonic Movie Trailer Comparison Pics - Check Out Before And After Sonic's Redesign

The improvement can not be expressed in percent.

A very big step in improvement. But why even go with the first design, to begin with? They should have known that this design will not appeal to any Sonic fan. I think they did this on purpose to get a lot of attention for this movie.

@MaxlRoseGNR [obligatory "20% cooler" remark]

sure, it's a MUCH better design.
but will the movie be good?

@grenworthshero A ghost from the past, from an old Goldeneye buddy!😉

@CharlieGirl
Don't get your hopes up. If nothing else Jim carrey will make it worthwhile!

He looks waaaaay better. Probably a P.R. stunt though. It's how he was gonna look in the end anyways. At least 28% more people know about the Sonic movie coming out now.

Even “Night & Day” aren’t different enough to emphasise the level of change and improvement. It’s like comparing a paper crane and a rock.

He no longer looks like a freak of nature. Now he just looks like Sonic.

@MaxlRoseGNR

No one has said “it’s over 9,000!” Yet?

Still looks a bit off. But definitely a large improvement.

@Spoony_Tech Rest assured I'm still lurking, even if I haven't made my presence known

Oh it absolutely looks better! But you know what would make it far better still?

Not being live action!

I hate this trend. I feel like, somehow, only Marvel Studios seem to understand that putting CG characters alongside real actors doesn't look good. It's why they bent over backward to minimize this in their films and kept it to action sequences as much as possible.

Why is it that Hollywood and Western audiences have so strongly turned away from traditional animation? I don't just love anime because I speak Japanese, I love it because Japan is pretty much the only place left producing anything in 2D animation that's not low budget kids shows.

You'd never be able to make a Gundam, Hellsing, Psycho Pass, Tokyo Ghoul, Re:Zero, type show in live action and have it look good. Not for me. The uncanny valley of having so much CG alongside real actors still looks so incredibly fake. But with 2D animation, or even Disney/Pixar style psuedo 3D animation style, when everything is animated you have so much more potential freedom!

I get that people seem to be able to get past it sometimes, people seem to like Detective Pikachu and even I love most of the Marvel MCU films, but I still really don't like the CG/live action mixtures.

Again you can fully animate something and it looks better - I point to a scene like the space battle in Star Wars Rogue One (one of the few things in the new SW I will praise) part of why it looks so good is because it's all CG. All of it, and excruciatingly advanced and high quality. But even Disney/Star Wars with their enormous operating budget could never afford to do that for a full movie. And personally I don't think that would be a good choice anyway.

@Heavyarms55
I think some peoples have been brainwashed by OMG Ultra HD realistic Western style for long time rather than Japanesque style of animation. It was a dogma that taught them if Ultra Realistic will make everything better and should be a norm.

Much better I think I will go to this one ... now if they can only make me un see Marios nipples and non facial and bald head 😳

The new design is a lot more expressive and a better design overall.

Sonic looks...like Sonic.

The movie will probably suck overall, but I gotta applaud the director and visual effect artists for crunching through this design change.

Put me off before but now I’m interested to watch it. Looks miles better.

@CharlieGirl It will probably fail Bechdel test, not that it has any worth.

but why does he have hair on his hair

At least we have a new rendition of sonic. We now have classic sonic, modern sonic, sonic boom sonic, and burn it with fire sonic

New design is great but I still feel like its gonna be mediocre. I still cringed at the trailer. The old design made this movie hilariously bad that I could laugh at it. The new design makes it mediocre

@CharlieGirl no it wont be good

@AlexOlney a day on Jupiter is 9 hours and 50 minutes while a day on venus is 243 days!

1st they gave us Sanic
Then they give us Sonic
Okay SEGA...

@Bizzyb #thanksobama

@Savino Isn't that crazy though, how sonic was supposed to be the edgier more mature character back in the day lol

@Heavyarms55 This is all just an extension of things Disney has done for years - combining animation with live action actors

Mary Poppins, Pete's Dragon, Fantasia, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, etc, etc.

I think the issue is that the 2D animation was...well....obvious. With CGI, animators are trying to make it blend in with reality.

It looks so much better more like Sonic, now I'm pretty hyped to watch it.💓

The trick was to make him look like Sonic. Who knew? But seriously, I still have no plan of watching it as Live-Action Sonic was never a good idea to begin with.

@RareFan The conspiratorial side of me also wants to believe that the saga of this movie's initial showing and eventual redesign was part of some brilliant, "4D chess" marketing campaign where they always planned to change the film and used the redesign to drum up good will and visibility in advance of the film's release.

Now is WAY better!

Meh. His eyes are still duo and he’s still got human teeth, but I suppose it will have to do. He at least resembles his original form.

@RareFan If that's true then hats off to them for genius marketing. I mean it is a bit absurd that no-one in the whole creation of the first one flagged it up that it looked so woefully wrong.

@Ralizah
Yes! That’s what I’ve been saying!

At least the makers listened to all the feedback. I am surprised they didn't just ignore it and go with their original horrific vision.

He doesn’t look like when that kid was turned into a monkey in the original “Jumanji” anymore!! Good job. Just like many other people feel though, I felt it was a stunt they pulled...

@Heavyarms55 Do you live in Japan or something? I feel like this should be obvious to Westerners. Nevertheless, the reason is the West has been conditioned to want high quality, realistic graphics. It’s the same reason why Microsoft and Sony are so popular in gaming and people want Nintendo to keep up with them. Animated media has a stigma for being low quality and kiddy, whereas realism is considered more mature. It probably has something to do with male ego and being “macho” enough to handle gritty situations, but I digress. Whatever the case, the West views the realistic style as superior.

I honestly hate it too. It all feels so same and boring and animated media seems to have a lot more creative ideas.

Everytime I look at the old version, I can't get Shadmans version out of my head.

@Anti-Matter Or, it could just be a matter of preference. Heh, dogma. Yeah sure.

@Bolt_Strike What’s with all these weird conspiracy theories about being conditioned to like certain things? Lol

Something gets presented to you. You either end up liking it or not. There isn’t some weird man in the sky or a shady government agency “conditioning” you to like a certain thing. Egads, this site....LOL

From this new trailer and Sonic's redesign, I've gone from hoping the movie bombs hard to actually giving it the benefit of the doubt and will now consider taking the family out to the cinema to hopefully have a fun time. I quite like the goofiness vibe (I chuckled at Sonic with the bat and elastic ball hehe) and honestly feel that this could be a guilty pleasure. I'll use Detective Pikachu as my bar to determine whether or not it is a good movie. Although visually impressive, DP bored me rigid despite having a strong trailer. Gloved fingers crossed for Sonic.

@Bolt_Strike No one has been conditioned. Some people like standard 2D animation, some people don’t. There’s no conspiracy. I personally don’t like anime (I’ve tried multiple times, almost forcing myself and still don’t like it) and the only animation I watch are US shows (American Dad, Rick & Morty, South Park). Some people prefer realism because it’s more relatable to them.

Too bad, this movies is still going to flop.

@RareFan That would be a very smart marketing strategy

The people complain, and the developers respond. That´s how things should be done.

Sega will get more money from the movie because of ... us! This is how you change a movie character for the better!

I like it. This is SO much better.

Will this be some major blockbuster? No. Does ever movie have to be ? No.

I think that the redesign changed me from not wanting to see it to definitely wanting to.

I definitely feel like they tried to make sonic this edgy modern thing when I see the comparison.

Will i watch this movie? Hell yeah!

Still ugly, but way way way better

So much better, I think with the fixed Sonic i'm interested. I think Jim Carrey looks like he is going to play a great Robotnik

Better by the difference between Sonic 3 and Sonic 06. Trailer feels alot likse they have been watching alot of detective pikachu compared to the werid edgefest of trailer 1.

Great trailer. I now have no qualms about taking my kids to see this as Sonic will no longer give them nightmares. Cheers!

I somehow liked spooky sonic. It looked like sonics hidden child from when he was with a human once

Shorter thinner but with bigger eyes hands feet and mouth.

Based on what is shown in this new trailer, it seems the movie has been rescripted and lots of scenes got changed. It seems they did it in order to give Sonic a more "Sonic" personality since the previous version his lines and tone of voice was very different, specifically that "uh... meow?" scene.

@Heavyarms55 I hate most trends, b/c well trends, but they seem to be doing fairly well for themselves. I mean who paid enough to see that gawdawful Smurfs movie so that they made a sequel? Some of that stuff just looks plain awful. But I do like me some good live action CG mash-ups b/c violence. The Pacific Rim movies are both pretty good. The 2nd is the Power Rangers movie that the Power Rangers movie should have been b/c that was just awful. And as much as I'm nostalgic for stop motion effects having grown up on all things Harryhausen, and rubber suits b/c Godzilla kaiju movies, the new King Kong and Godzilla movies have been watchable. And Detective Pikachu was so good I rewatched it w/ the commentary on. (Though it in my head it was just Deadpool 3.) And the now 4 Avatar sequels will probably be 90% CG around 1 guy in a green suit. While I'd like to think the world is ready to move on and let them die like the Terminator sequel flops I think they'll all do really well. B/c that's what people want. Despite what Scorsese says.

This, despite Teddy, looks like trash. Carrey dumbs it down a bit too much for me. But at least Sonic doesn't look like a skate now.

@Bolt_Strike Man, you give the simple right answer - more people see live action movies than cartoons - and all you get for your troubles is being labeled a conspiracy nut. That's gotta hurt.

Wonder if they will discuss this whole fiasco in the special edition blu ray release of this movie. Would be interesting to see how they went about editing in the new design and some of the challenges they faced with implementing it over an already existing model

@Heavyarms55 I dunno, I wouldn’t call Adventure Time, Regular Show, Avatar: TLA, Steven Universe, Voltron: LD, We Bare Bears, OKKO, TAWO Gumball or Gravity Falls ‘LOS budget animation

It be cool if they add all the previous already recorded scenes with the old desing added as a blu-ray bonus just to see what it almost could have been.

@Heavyarms55 Reading your comment on the Pokemon article, and then this one, is like getting whiplash.

@MaxlRoseGNR

I can quantify it.

It's a 2000% improvement.

I still don't understand what they were going for with that first design, other than giving kids nightmares. This is a huge improvement and worth the delay. The movie itself still looks kinda corny but I wouldn't mind bringing my kid to see it.

To me the first design kinds looks better for a realistic move on sonic but the second one, its like watching space balls with 3d animation and not realistic.

Oh my gosh the creepy factor has been reduced by like 63%.

They saved my boy :')

I'm having a hard time telling if this actually looks good or if it is still bad but it just looks amazing in comparison to the first reveal.

Comparing this to his actual design, why are his arms still blue and why does he still have veneers? I don't mind his eyes being separated though as I always found his conjoined eyes weird but it is still a departure regardless.

I wonder if half of the people that complained about the original design are actually gonna buy the ticket

Why does there have to be a live-action Sonic movie anyway?

Much much much much better! This actually looks like Sonic. The first one did not. It looked like a Troll doll mated with a scrub brush. Well done!

Sonic looks great, but I don't think this will change much in the movie. It still looks like Jim Carey hamming it up will be the best part of the movie, and that's not worth spending $10 on.

Sonic actually looks endearing in the 6th comparison pic.
...I need my meds at this rate.

@technotreegrass

Oh, I totally agree but at least Sonic looks like Sonic now.
Silver linings and all that.

@SonOfVon

Honestly ?
I rarely if ever buy a movie ticket. I just find it too expensive and not worth the time and effort, when I can buy the dvd or blu ray for the same price tag, a few months down the line.
And watch the movie as much as I want.

I didn't even go to Avengers 4, instead I plan to pick up the blu ray.

I'm surely the only one, but for a live action movie I found the original design as a base better than the new one. They should have just changed some details like the teeth, for example.

Just seeing Green Hill Zone in the trailer earns this a thumbs up from me.

The movie might still not wind up being all that great even despite the low bar video game movies have in general, but at least he looks 80% closer to what he's supposed to now.

Well, with the Sonic design being pretty well fixed, maybe we can turn our attention to how much Robotnik was softened to just end up as Jim Carrey with a Snydley Whiplash moustache. Yes, I know we had that quick shot where he's bald and the moustache was wilder, but couldn't they have given him at least a little of the egg shaped body as well? It also seems like he's flailing and dancing a bit too much for the character. Not sure he needs to be a full-on "zany" villian. Let's wait and see, though.

I'm sure nobody expects a masterpiece, we just wanted Sonic to look like Sonic. Or at least like a reasonable interpretation of Sonic and not whatever the previous abomination was. Whoever put the teeth on that thing still deserves a lifetime ban from character design.

@Heavyarms55

"I feel like, somehow, only Marvel Studios seem to understand that putting CG characters alongside real actors doesn't look good."

You mean except for Hulk, Rocket, Groot, Thanos, Ironman, Black Panther and all the other cgi characters that are mixing with real actors throughout EVERY MCU movie?

What are you even talking about??? Lmao.

Prefer the old one.

@Heavyarms55 Western societies generally don't realize the full capability of animation. As others have mentioned, animation is usually regarded as children's entertainment. When it isn't, its some adult sitcom or a low-brow parody of these children's cartoons.

I understand your frustration. We are past the days of Bob Clampett and now we have to deal with the cynical treatment of the medium by Hollywood and many others.

On a positive note, if you want to see something with 2D animation in the West that is very artistic and (mostly) free of juvenile humor, I suggest Genndy Tartakovsky's Primal.

@MaxlRoseGNR sure it can it's ∞% better

Still. Why is it FUR? A hedgehog isn't particularily fluffy no?

@RareFan they thought they could get away with. they went easy mode.. made by amateur... then they had to pay for a real person who does have the talent. And voila this is the result. It's all about the money. As low possible and so less quality. But since us fans have moaned voila we got the better one

It's very hard to believe these are both from the same movie. Good job, Paramount!

Well, he actually looks like Sonic instead of some weird monstrosity.

I have to wonder what movie executive green lit the original design and thought that's what people wanted.

It shows how little Hollywood has any idea of what's really good and bad.

Phenomenally better. Well done!

Looks better however he no longer has red pumas

I have a feeling the movie is still going to suck.

anybody else feel they did the ugly design and redesign intentionally in order to get the most press and potential for sales?

Looks amazing! I love it!

@Effortless-gamer Pay close attention to how much their on screen and how often they on screen alongside real actors. Marvel heavily minimizes it. Iron Man almost always removes his helmet during non-combat scenes so we can see his real face, and during action scenes we see inside it. Hulk, Groot and Rocket are usually the focus when they are on screen, without human actors or they are in the background in a scene where you're not likely watching them closely. There are times when they can't avoid it and I promise you, a LOT more effort and cost went into those scenes. Because it is very hard to make it look good.

@Heavyarms55

I disagree that they "reduce it as much as possible". Case in point; Thor Ragnarok. Hulk is on screen with real actors for a lot of the movies run time and looks dreadful. Again, what are you talking about?

@KitChan If that's the case that makes a lot more sense. But this would be a special exception. I still say CG characters alongside real actors looks bad and this trend of making live action adaptions of IP that was never designed for live action is bad.

@Bolt_Strike I do live in Japan, yes.

@Mr_Muscle @tekknik You don't seem to understand what conditioning means. It's not necessarily a conspiracy to say people are conditioned to like something, conditioning is such a pervasive psychological tactic used by everyone from the government and large scale corporations to your parents and your elementary school teacher. And it's also not necessarily a bad thing sometimes, it's just how the brain learns.

In this case, it's no secret that the technology and entertainment companies pushing for realism are conditioning you to like them. They want to make money, so of course they want you to think their products are good so that you buy them.

As for how realism relates to all of this, they're pushing for higher specs that are capable of more detail to make the new products look superior to their old ones and make them seem obsolete. Again, look at gaming, they put out 720p resolution graphics and then a few years later they jump to 1080p to try and get us to abandon the 720p console for the 1080p console, and then they do the same thing with 4K and so on. If they didn't, you probably would be less likely to upgrade from your 720p console for years. And as they push for higher quality graphics, those higher quality graphics are capable of more and more and come closer to what real life looks like. So to try and impress people with the capabilities of the upgraded graphics, they opt for realism.

@Heavyarms55's point about film companies wanting to save on animation costs probably also has something to do with it as well.

@Bolt_Strike Sure, I understand what conditioning is. I'm not debating that. I just think that the way you are portraying it (something being done to us by the movie industry) is a bit tin-foil-hat.

Nobody is forcing anyone to see any of these things, so there's always a choice involved by the person watching. If anyone is conditioning anything, it's the person who makes the choice to watch these things. It really makes sense, if you think about it on an individual basis.

Case-in-point: While I do like the improved portrayal of Sonic, I wouldn't be caught dead in that theater. Not my cup of tea. Doesn't matter how "conditioned," one may be to pretty graphics. You could say that I conditioned myself to abhor movies. Same same. In the end, this isn't China or something, where we are being conditioned to believe things by our government. We always have our freedom of will to choose what we like and what we do not like.

@Mr_Muscle No one's forcing you, no, but they don't need to. If they make their look appealing, people will eventually gravitate to them on their own after repeated exposure. May not every single person, but definitely enough to be successful. It's more of a subtle nudge in the direction they want you to go instead of a forceful push.

@Mr_Muscle @Bolt_Strike couldn’t have said it better myself.

@Heavyarms55 - Perhaps I'm mistaken, but isn't Psycho Pass relatively light on fantastical elements? Admittedly I've only seen the first season, but it didn't look too crazy for a sci-fi crime noir.

As for live-action vs animation, my guess is: Animation=Cartoon=Less Realistic=Less Mature/Relatable=Less Appealing. This applies for both kids and adults. Even within animation, 3D is much more appealing apparently than 2D, and the more realistic you can get, the better (notice how the highest grossing animated film currently is the live-action adaptation of The Lion King). It probably doesn't help that barely anyone outside Japan even makes 2D animated films any more.
Also, to be fair, Japan is also guilty of making live-action adaptations if animated properties (AoT, Bleach, Fullmetal Alchemist, etc.) so it's not like the US is the only one doing it

@FullMetalWesker They could rework some of the sci-fi elements easily enough to make a live action version of Psycho Pass work, that's probably true. But I do think they'd have to rework the guns and some of the stuff that comes later.

As for the animation = cartoon = less realistic, I just flat out do not agree. Plenty of live action films are massively unrealistic, while plenty of animation is massively realistic.

The problem comes from the what I've heard people call the uncanny valley. That effect where you're seeing something on the screen that doesn't look like it's actually there or doesn't look like it belongs there. In a fully animated scene you have complete creative control, this gives you a much wider range of creative freedom. Thus you can create things like fantastical creatures, sci-fi machines, or settings that don't exist anywhere in the real world and it doesn't look wrong.

But then you have that scene in Avengers Endgame where the Hulk is in a restaurant and it just looks so fake, like you just know all the other actors are just taking to a green screen or a person wearing a green suit. You could animate that same scene and it would look much better in my mind.

I am aware that the west hasn't totally and completely abandoned 2D animation. There's a few decent cartoons still, and the DC animated films which are almost universally better than their live action films. Yet hardly anyone knows about them and, at best, they get one evening in like 4 theaters nationwide...

What it seems like a lot of people don't understand is that animation is not a genre, it's a medium. And it is one you can have a lot more creative freedom with than live action film.

And finally, you're right, Japan has done live action adaptations too. But none have been terribly successful and Japan still puts out a ton of 2D animation as well. But no 2D films get mainstream treatment in the US anymore and even Disney seems to be moving away from their 3D animation.

Looks great, the movie will probably still fail though...

@SigourneyBeaver Me too! The old one was actually interesting. This just looks like Sonic, it's going to be a boring film with a bland Sonic.

If there had been a small indie cinema near where I live I’d probably have gone to see it (not paying like £13 for a ticket at the Odean) but I will now probably upgrade from wait till on streaming service to rent via PSN.

Not only does he look a ton better, but the trailer itself is better. I'm not sure I would have wanted to see it if it was the new sonic in the original trailer but now I kinda do want to see it.

@Heavyarms55 I also think you're right. I remember seeing Blinky Bill, Toad Patrol and few others western 2D animation and I think there's a lot potential to be used for this genre.

We just need people willing to do this without fearing what the media say about them. I myself am interested in 2D animation.

@SmaggTheSmug damn, you're right. well there goes my interest!

It's crazy how bad the first design was, you almost think they did this all in purpose to generate hype . I wouldn't be surprised if this was all planned.
Hoping the movie flops because of Jim Carrey and his excessive political "statements."

@Heavyarms55 I mean, there's been some amazing films done in that style. Who Framed Roger Rabbit for example never would have worked as fully animated, and Space Jam (while not amazing), is in the same boat. Even Detective Pikachu would have lost something in 3D/2D animation.

But for those examples that worked, there's so much that didn't. Goosebumps would have been better fully animated, TMNT's latest release was honestly pretty bad compared to all the other live action movies that just used suits, Yogi Bear was... a thing. Disney Live Action Remakes that feature tons of CGI have been terrible outside of like, Jungle Book, and let's not even talk about Smurfs.

It's a style, and unfortunately it's one that's scene way more failures than successes. But the successes (and some of the failures) make so much money we'll keep seeing it.

@link3710 Those are exceptions and special cases. When part of the premise is having cartoon/animated characters in the real world it doesn't count. We, the viewers, know they aren't even trying to make them look real or like they are actually there.

@Heavyarms55 Yeah, I was basically agreeing with you.

@Heavyarms55 so you're just going to ignore my point about Hulk in Thor Ragnarok that tramples over your pretentious essay stating Marvel are the ONLY STUDIO that understands and that they actively reduce cgi characters mixing with real actors onscreen? Ok.

Come on, it's not about understanding how cgi characters interact with real actors. It's about the budget for special effects. The Sonic movie will have a tiny budget compared to any of the Marvel movies you're referring to and comparing them is not only unfair, it's ridiculous!

Marvel have Disney levels of money funding them and comparing this movie to something Disney can afford to shart out is entirely ill considered and a poor comparison from you.

Disney have some of the best 3d effects studios in the world under their belt. When the budget is reduced for a "less financially successful" franchise, such as Thor (compared to the Avengers), the cgi takes a turn for the worst.

I'm not saying Thor Ragnarok is a bad movie, it's great. But that doesn't change the fact that the cgi is frequently dubious, making your argument entirely invalid. Even worse, you can't argue so you just ignore me.

New design is absolutely better.