I feel so dirty.

Rlan · Post by **Rlan** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 2:30 am

<img src="http://www.kmart.com.au/images/catimage ... jpg"></img>

I saw this in a KMart Catalogue a few days ago. I thought it was just showing the seperate DVDs, but it's actually a compilation of Sonic Christmas Blast, Gadget saves Christmas and Jungle Bells Rock. For $8.62AU [$6.70US], sounded like a good buy. I've never seen SCB before, so why not?

Dear God.

That was terrible. It's like they cut the budget of an AoStH episode in half and made this. Robotnik looks even more horrible than before, and some kid has a dislocated jaw the whole way.

Even at a bargin price, it doesn't feel like it was worth it.

The Scarlet Scorpion · Thu Nov 25, 2004 3:08 am

Rlan wrote:

I saw this in a KMart Catalogue a few days ago. I thought it was just showing the seperate DVDs, but it's actually a compilation of Sonic Christmas Blast, Gadget saves Christmas and Jungle Bells Rock. For $8.62AU [$6.70US], sounded like a good buy. I've never seen SCB before, so why not?

Dear God.

That was terrible. It's like they cut the budget of an AoStH episode in half and made this. Robotnik looks even more horrible than before, and some kid has a dislocated jaw the whole way.

Even at a bargin price, it doesn't feel like it was worth it.

Ah, well, at least you got some pre-Disney "I.G." there, so that's gotta count for something. Not much, but something.

Speaking of which, did anyone see the direct to video/DVD "Inspector Gadget's Last Case"? Being an old fan of the original series, I got it and watched it... and damn it to Hell, that bastard Gadget Mobile from the the emm-effing Disney movie was there. Also taken from the film was the whole Riverton/police officer thing. Originally, Inspector Gadget was a globe-trotting agent of InterPol, if memory serves, and there was no "Riverton". Ever. But Gadget Mobile"?! He was the worst crime of the film! Instead of a family-oriented minivan that could turn into a sleek sportscar if the need arose, they gave us an obnoxious, irritating, unfunny jerkoff. And worst of all, he was a "Black Comedy-Relief Guy". Ugh.

I also didn't like "I.G.L.C." for it's redesigned characters. And of all the model sheet changes, Mad Cat got the worst new look. Instead of the snickering, gold-toothed fellow he was before, he became an oversized, scraggly wreck.

And don't even talk to me about the plot. Just... don't.

Anyhow, you can always return the DVD.

And what exactly is "Jungle Bells Rock", anyhow? I've never heard of it.

Rlan · Post by **Rlan** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 9:19 am

Oops, Jingle Bells Rock.

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 9:51 am

Jingle Bell Rock is, I believe - a Christmas special about a North Pole elf who wants to start a rock and roll band and ends up writing the song "Jingle Bell Rock".

Fairly stupid. And seeing as how I'm a fan of just about any Christmas special no matter how insipid or smarmy, that's saying a lot.

Neo Yi · Post by **Neo Yi** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:58 am

Oh, that Christmas special. I remember watching it like in 1997 or something and I kept asking myself, "When did Sonic get SO fast that he can spin around the entire globe?", then I remember this is based on the AoSth cartoon where nothing is ever taken seriously.
~Neo

SuperKnux · Post by **SuperKnux** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:11 pm

Hey, I saw that DVD (only it was just the Sonic Christmas Special by itself) at the local Pep Boys the other day when I was looking at some nice rims for my car.

I didn't buy it, but something tells me I should. It's like 10 bucks, I think.

Post by Bo » Sat Nov 27, 2004 8:46 am

I remember when that AoStH Christmas special aired... it was well after the demise of the series, right? And it had characters from the comic book, if I recall correctly. And Sonic became Santa Claus. That was weird.

Brazillian Cara · Post by **Brazillian Cara** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 10:45 am

It may be or not off-topic, but...
...SA was the best thing that ever happened to Sonic. EVER.

Locit · Post by **Locit** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 1:08 pm

Yeah, they had Sally as his 'girlfriend' who never said a word. You just saw her twice. I think there was a tie-in with a cheese stick brand or something because Sonic 3d Blast was coming out shortlyand SEGA was never really big on advertising with its own money.

daytonafathead · Post by **daytonafathead** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 1:31 pm

Princess Sally: The only female Sonic character that doesn't wear clothes.

Brazillian Cara · Post by **Brazillian Cara** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 3:34 pm

I'll talk by many now:
Princess Sally shouldn't be considered a Sonic character.

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 3:42 pm

I remember hearing about that Christmas special (and Bo is right, this was at least a couple of years after the show ended) and being especially excited to see it. And, of course, when I finally did see it I was, to say the least, quite disappointed.

It was bad even by AoStH standards - and I liked AoStH! I think I was one of maybe three people on the planet that actually preferred AoStH to the SatAM cartoons as a kid and I was sad to see mention of that "other" series.

I was also disappointed that Sally was mentioned in it, and that Sonic made mention of being a Freedom Fighter. I had always imagined, even as a kid, that the AoStH cartoons were more related to the video games, where as SatAM and the Archie series were kind of in their own world.

But yeah, anyway, it was really fuggin' bad and I was embarassed to have been excited for it.

Neo Yi · Post by **Neo Yi** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 5:37 pm

I always thought that Christmas special was DIC's way of merging SatAM with AoSth...done in a poorly fashion.
~Neo

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 7:30 pm

I was also disappointed that Sally was mentioned in it, and that Sonic made mention of being a Freedom Fighter. I had always imagined, even as a kid, that the AoStH cartoons were more related to the video games, where as SatAM and the Archie series were kind of in their own world.

Yeah, looking back - AoStH had much lower quality animation - but it was much closer to the game universe than SatAM. Not only in characters, but in tone - I've said it once, and I've said it again - SatAM was too dark for a TV show about a blue hedgehog that could run at Mach 1.

Also, I do prefer Scratch and Grounder over Snively or Bocoe and Decoe. Bocoe and Decoe are just annoying. The interaction between S&G was always entertaining. With Grounder being stupid and Scratch being angry.

Not to mention that they were based on actual Sonic enemies, while Snively, Bocoe, and Decoe were all just pulled out of thin air.

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 7:34 pm

Beyond that, the stars of the show were always Sonic, Tails and Robotnik.

In SatAM, Sonic wasn't even the most interesting character and Tails appearances were a treat more than the norm.

Post by **Esrever** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 10:10 pm

I didn't have a problem with the darker, more serious tone of SatAM... actually, that was what I liked about it the most. What really put me off was the infusion of the old restore-the-unrightfully-deposed-monarch structure into the plot. I mean, come on America, you rejected the monarchy hundreds of years ago, you can stop giving them ideological blowjobs in all of your cartoons now.

The other big offender was the character design. Even though they made Sonic and the other game characters look different, the new characters like Sally STILL looked like they belonged in a different cartoon. The designs just conflicted, and it never stopped looking bizarre.

Robotnik was ugly looking, but honestly, I didn't mind them making him more of a frightening dictator and less of a wacky genius. It's not like his character was all that developed beforehand, and it was interesting to seem him actually look... well, threatening! :)

AoStH was more like the games, but it was still really, really bad. It was a comedy show that wasn't funny. :/

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 10:19 pm

It really wasn't funny at all, you're right, but try telling that to my 7-year-old self.

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 10:29 pm

As I've said, even looking back - S&G had their moments. Maybe not laugh out loud humor, but enough to get a chuckle of a dopey grin.

G: "I'll take a chili dog."
S: "What? You don't eat."
G: "Chili cleans out my engines."
S: " . . . ugh."

The interaction between Sonic, Tails, and Robotnik was fairly humorlous and tiresome, though.

J.E.Smith · Post by **J.E.Smith** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 10:34 pm

daytonafathead wrote:Princess Sally: The only female Sonic character that doesn't wear clothes.

...you know, the Sally being naked debate doesn't really make sense when you consider all the Sonic Team males(minus the human characters of course, duh) wear nothing more than gloves and footwear. Her fur covers everything, you know.

Even though you guys don't count Sally as a real Sonic character, you have to count her as a Sega character because Sega owns the rights to her. It's like the Disney/Square-Enix deal, any original characters made by Square for Kingdom Hearts become Disney's property. Same thing here, any character made by DiC or Archie, no matter how half-assed or retarded they are, becomes Sega's property after all is said and done.

At one time Sega did care for Sally, even though she wasn't created by them. They were planning to make a game with her at one point, though nothing came out of it. They even stopped Archie from killing her off for good in the comic just in case they decided to make it one day, plus they were also putting out Sally plushes at the time.(The reason why Sally and the other SatAM characters were in the comic in the first place is because Sega ordered Archie to use them)Why make merchendise of a character from a cancelled cartoon, and who was killed off in the comic?

Baba O'Reily · Post by **Baba O'Reily** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 10:50 pm

It's like owning a chain of used car lots.

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 11:24 pm

It's like the Disney/Square-Enix deal, any original characters made by Square for Kingdom Hearts become Disney's property. Same thing here, any character made by DiC or Archie, no matter how half-assed or retarded they are, becomes Sega's property after all is said and done.

Too bad Nintendo wasn't intelligent to make that same deal with Square. Square owns all the rights to the Super Mario RPG characters save for the ones Nintendo created previously. Which means that Square still owns the rights to fan-favorites like Mallow, Geno, Smithy, Booster, and Valentina . . . which is a shame.

And also makes no sense, seeing as Square is almost 100% likely never to use any of them again.

Neo Yi · Post by **Neo Yi** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 11:25 pm

Looking back to AoSth, I can see myself no longer laughing at it's wacky humor, but I admit, I won't regret not liking it. I mean, after all, I was a small child and anything that involved Looney Tune (cartoons which I still laugh to to this day) style slapstick was damn fine enough for me.

SatAM I did enjoy as well. I honestly didn't care that it was serious, as a young girl, it was Sonic and because I recognized him, I watched it. Looking back, I see how different it is from Sega. I don't really care if it is (it's probably because of my belief that there are such things as multiple universes of the same character, etc.), but one thing that did irk me was how underused Tails was. You'd think one of the leading characters in Sonic 2 would have garnered him a higher spot in the show (although Season 3 was about to do that, but ya know, the show being canned and all).
~Neo

Post by **Esrever** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 1:28 am

You were 7, grant? Am I that much older than you? It was '93, when that show came on, right? That would have made me 11 or 12...

Post by **Segaholic2** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 1:29 am

You were born in '82? Yeah, you're on the older end. Especially after this new forum opened.

Psxphile · Post by **Psxphile** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 10:03 am

Zeta wrote:Too bad Nintendo wasn't intelligent to make that same deal with Square. Square owns all the rights to the Super Mario RPG characters save for the ones Nintendo created previously. Which means that Square still owns the rights to fan-favorites like Mallow, Geno, Smithy, Booster, and Valentina . . . which is a shame.

And also makes no sense, seeing as Square is almost 100% likely never to use any of them again.

Well, Geno made a (very) small cameo in Superstar Saga, if that counts for anything.

Baba 'O-Reilly wrote:It's like owning a chain of used car lots.

Or the Seattle Mariners. Except they've been exploiting Ken Griffey all throughout the N64 era.

Does Nintendo still have part-ownership of the team?

The GHZ Forum

I feel so dirty.

I feel so dirty.

Re: I feel so dirty.