r/boxoffice • u/RepeatEconomy2618 • Jan 21 '25
✍️ Original Analysis I'm still confused why Pokemon: Detective Pikachu didn't hit as a franchise but Sonic of all things did..
Comparing The First Film of Sonic and Detective Pikachu, it's apparent that Pokemon was the much better film, how did Sonic get 2 sequels but Detective Pikachu 2 is still in development hell? I know they're working on a new film but it's been almost 6 years, I think Pokemon: Detective Pikachu had everything going for it with The Cast, The Pokemon Designs, The Visuals and so on, it was a very charming and cute movie but overall it didn't leave a lasting impression but somehow Sonic did? I just don't get it..
343
u/JannTosh50 Jan 21 '25
It is actually all due to budget. DP actually made similar numbers to the Sonic movies worldwide but cost a decent amount more.
209
u/007Kryptonian WB Jan 21 '25 edited Jan 21 '25
Right actually, Detective Pikachu reached a number that none of the Sonic movies (even 3 as of today) have crossed: $450m. And DP was still successful on its 150m budget.
The premise of OP’s post is off. DP did hit as a franchise and they’re working on a sequel right now.
94
u/Jbewrite Jan 21 '25
A franchise with 6 year waits is a bad idea, though. That's sorta the point of the post.
39
u/007Kryptonian WB Jan 21 '25
Sure - Beyond The Spider Verse and Matt Reeves’ Batman is going through the same process. Avatar previously did as well.
Doesn’t change that they were still hit entries. DP was 100% a hit, especially compared to Sonic which was the focus of OP’s title.
16
u/Jbewrite Jan 21 '25
Sonic was more of a hit in terms of its budget and lasting franchise appeal, with each movie grossing more than the last. Avatar and Spider Verse did well enough to warrant a six year wait, did Detective Pikachu? Pokemon is the largest media franchise in history and it's first live action movie grossed 400mil and had a lukewarm reception and almost zero cultural relevance. The sequel has a lot going against it now.
→ More replies (1)2
2
u/Ironsam811 Jan 21 '25
Spiderman and Batman are lagging due to quality control. They were great movies and the crowd has high expectations. I dont think anyone had any expectations for detective pikachu.
2
u/XegrandExpressYT Jan 22 '25
The Batman part 2 shivering nervously . I honestly don't expect to see it come out until 2027 tbh
→ More replies (1)2
u/YoloIsNotDead DreamWorks Jan 22 '25
On the other hand, it's also Pokemon. Idk about everyone but from what I've seen the Pokemon fandom is more than alive and well these days.
5
u/XegrandExpressYT Jan 22 '25
It was also released a week after endgame , so in all regards, it actually held up pretty well
10
u/Dwayne30RockJohnson Jan 21 '25
There is no sequel coming. It’s been 6 years.
4
Jan 22 '25 edited Feb 25 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/Dwayne30RockJohnson Jan 22 '25 edited Jan 22 '25
20 year later sequel no one asked for, or thought possible, isn’t the same as a quick follow-up sequel due to the success of the first.
20
u/RepeatEconomy2618 Jan 21 '25
It's taking a very long time for the sequel to come out and there's been no updates
19
u/shaunrundmc Jan 21 '25
Probably because it's not cheap to do and Nintendo famously does not fuck around with Quality when it comes to their flagship IPs.
They have canceled and dumped 100% complete games to start from scratch when it didn't meet their standards.
2
2
u/Subject_Tutor Jan 22 '25
Didn't the main actor (I forgot his name) confirm that they were NOT working on a sequel last year?
2
u/Pokemon-trainer-BC Jan 22 '25
Right actually, Detective Pikachu reached a number that none of the Sonic movies (even 3 as of today) have crossed: $450m.
To be fair, Detective Pikachu also didn't reach this number. I know the Box Office Mojo states this, and a lot of other sources took over this number, but the Box Office Mojo made a mistake. They gave the 2023 UK rerelease a box office of 16,5 million USD, while in reality it was closer to 5000 USD. So yeah,...
The-Numbers for example places the worldwide box office revenue at $428,919,826.
But the movie still had a great result of course.
2
u/DragonHedgehog Jan 22 '25
But 94 million of the revenue came from China, and the studio barely gets a cut from the Chinese theatre's.
16
u/RepeatEconomy2618 Jan 21 '25
It only cost 150million to make and made over 450million. I'd say that's a huge win
→ More replies (1)5
u/isaidwhatisaidok Jan 21 '25
It’s not great when you factor in a 100-150 million marketing budget.
10
u/str8rippinfartz Jan 21 '25
I wouldn't say a huge win, but it still likely was reasonably profitable on balance
8
u/SweetWolf9769 Jan 21 '25
oh no, the movie only netted 45-33% (150mil-200mil), what an absolute failure of a film!
5
u/critch Jan 22 '25 edited Feb 25 '25
offbeat distinct quaint jellyfish ad hoc party hard-to-find act soup encouraging
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
2
136
u/anonRedd Jan 21 '25
Paramount was probably more eager for sequels as they're desperate for bankable IP in a way that Legendary and WB are not.
21
u/RepeatEconomy2618 Jan 21 '25
I actually agree with this
15
u/Blinky-Bear Jan 21 '25
and lets not forget Legendary/WB had a fall out as business partners during the pandemic so any talks for a DP sequel was probably canned because of this
8
8
u/chocobochubby Jan 21 '25
Not to mention just open to spending way more in general. The announcements of each new project, and the insane amounts they were spending was entertaining news for the last few years, leading up to Skydance acquisition.
2
u/op340 Jan 22 '25 edited Jan 22 '25
I wouldn't mind them nabbing the movie rights to Digimon. That's got more of a story than trying to create a Pokemon story from thin air. Not to mention you can use the Amblin angle as it's a group of kids that get lost in the Digital World and befriend monsters that range from cute/cuddly to badass dangerous.
106
u/Benkins1989 Jan 21 '25
Jim Carrey deserves some credit for drawing adults in and making the Sonic films more attractive to parents. I know we’re living in an age when stars aren’t necessarily draws (outside of a few huge names), but it surely helps to have a ‘90s/‘00s icon in a prominent role. Carrey seems to have an unblemished reputation and is beloved by multiple generations. These films also prove his comedic talent is as sharp as ever, and he brings some great acting to what could otherwise be a one-dimensional character.
24
u/tabbynat Jan 21 '25
I would not go these without Jim, and I grew up with the original Sonic games.
It’s just a dream to see Jim on the big screen again, and he looks like he’s having hell of a lot of fun too, so that helps.
Push The Button
29
11
u/Ironsam811 Jan 21 '25
That was definitely a draw for the first movie for sure. I remember even thinking “be interesting to at least see what Jim Carrey does, even if the movie is shit”
2
→ More replies (1)2
u/Golden-Owl Jan 24 '25
Jim Carrey really nailed it
At no point did I ever not feel that “this is not Eggman”. He really took everything about what made Eggman such a fun character and built upon it in his own personal way
22
u/No-Olive-5584 Jan 21 '25
Why does it sound like you’re jealous of Sonic’s success? Both Pikachu and Sonic were hits, it’s just Sonic had more leverage to make more films.
104
u/Totallycomputername Jan 21 '25
Speaking just for Sonic the movie nailed it. It was a good yet simple story that was easy for kids and adults to watch.
As for detective pikachu, I didn't think it was bad but my kids would rather watch pokemon 2000 or some of the older movies over watching pikachu again.
20
u/erikaironer11 Jan 21 '25
I don’t have kids but I’d imagine the same thing.
For a Pokemon story is was very meh, with very little actual Pokemon action. I can’t see myself enjoying it as a kid compared to other animated Pokemon movies
→ More replies (2)16
u/_ASG_ Jan 21 '25 edited Jan 21 '25
I enjoyed the movie, but the fact that it was based on a bizarre spin-off and it took place in a region that didn't allow battling were... interesting choices.
Maybe they were afraid of bad publicity if they made a big budget movie about pseudo-animals fighting each other under their trainers' command? I know there's a whole ethical discussion we could have about if Pokémon battling could be morally alright, but not allowing that to be the focus takes away from a pretty integral part of Pokémon.
12
u/erikaironer11 Jan 21 '25
But they have a scene of actual illegal underground fighting. I feel if they do exactly what the show does and these fantasy animals live for the thrill of battle it wouldn’t be controversial
3
u/_ASG_ Jan 21 '25
They do have that scene, but like you said, it's "illegal," so the film doesn't focus on it long or glorify it.
If they wanted to tell a story about battling, they may want to make it clear that Pokémon enjoy it and are intelligent enough to consent. Even though the franchise has been around forever, the dog and cock fighting comparisons are still made and groups like PETA will always complain.
In the end, I'm not saying that this was the reason why they avoided a standard Pokémon story. As others have said, the Detective direction may have been easier and cheaper in the long run. But I could also see a studio being nervous about making a whole movie about that.
→ More replies (5)2
u/Secksualinnuendo Jan 23 '25
Also I could listen to Ben Schwatz as Sonic all day. But after like 45 mins im over Ryan Reynolds as pikachu
49
u/Gear4Vegito Jan 21 '25 edited Jan 21 '25
I don’t even know how you make a Detective Pikachu 2 based off the ending of the first one LOL.
Sonic has the advantage of already have baselines for stories through the games. Like Sonic 3 is much easier to make with the framework of Sonic Adventure 2.
11
u/herg3 Jan 21 '25
That was my thought, I don't how loyal it is to the game but Detective Pikachu felt pretty conclusive as a story. The first Sonic movie meanwhile just felt like an origin story, the ending teased for a sequel, and anyone wanting a Sonic movie is probably going to want Tails, Knuckles etc. who were not in the first movie but would come along in the sequels.
2
→ More replies (2)4
u/RepeatEconomy2618 Jan 21 '25
Well they did recently make A Detective Pikachu 2 Game, so they could probably borrow elements from that.
Pokemon has almost 30 years of content to make your films on
19
u/CelestialWolfZX Jan 21 '25
If you had actually played the Detective Pikachu Returns game, you'd know that that game already bases it plotline on how the movie played out.
60
Jan 21 '25
[deleted]
14
u/RepeatEconomy2618 Jan 21 '25
It still made over 400million dollars, that's a lot of money and they could've gone forward with a sequel
21
u/infinite884 Jan 21 '25
but its the pokemon brand and that ain't alot of money for what the franchise usually brings in in other media I'm sure having those rights aren't cheap
17
3
u/RepeatEconomy2618 Jan 21 '25
Detective Pikachu made more money than each of the Theatrical Pokemon Films that released in the early 2000s
16
3
u/infinite884 Jan 21 '25
live action and animated are two different beasts, by how much Pokemon is popular the very first live action pokemon should have cleared a billion EASY. Detective pikachu didn't even hit 500 million and yeah it wasn't the live action pokemon movie that I would have wanted but this could have been an experiment to if people want to see a pokemon live action anything and detective pikachu having a budget of 150 million, this movie barely broke even.
2
u/MattWolf96 Jan 22 '25
Anime is also dirt cheap animation, the people who animate it aren't even always paid in minimum wage in Japan, on top of that it is often times outsourced to South Korea which is apparently even cheaper.
14
u/Atrampoline Jan 21 '25
Detective Pikachu was also a lot darker, with a more complicated story. The Sonic films have largely been simple and bubbly in terms of their subject matter and plot.
→ More replies (5)
29
u/Distinct-Shift-4094 Jan 21 '25
Honestly, I love Pokemon but i want a full on animated movie like Mario not some weird Detective thing with a talking Pikachu.
→ More replies (6)7
u/DumbWhore4 Jan 21 '25
A lot of the pokemon movies have talking pokemon though
2
u/MattWolf96 Jan 22 '25
I think almost all of them do, (usually through telepathy) the first movie had Mewtwo, the 2nd Lugia, the 3rd Entei, the 4, Celebi I think? (I never liked that movie well so I don't remember it well) I think the 5th one actually did ditch the talking ones from what I remember. Jurachi talked in the 6th one and I quit watching them religiously after that but I know that Lucario and Zoroark, I think even Darkrai talked in late ones. Pikachu even briefly talked in one of the more recent ones.
12
u/MoonMan997 Best of 2023 Winner Jan 21 '25
There’s kind of a few reasons:
1) The cost. This was a far more ambitious film than Sonic 1 and Legendary/WB put into the money to make it so. It cost $50m+ more than Sonic 1, so it likely wasn’t as profitable. I suspect WB/Legendary expected more from this as well, but underestimated how poor a release date this had sandwiched in a highly competitive May 2019.
2) The narrative. The decision to go with Detective Pikachu was an excuse to hone in on the Pokémon brands mascot to appeal to a more casual audience outside the core fanbase. On paper there is logic, but I don’t think WB/Legendary considered that the premise of this particular story is a far harder sell and frankly a bit off-putting I.e. why is Ryan Reynold’s voice coming out of a character well-known for not speaking? But they wanted a known-star associated with the brand which in all fairness is something Paramount/Sega did with Sonic 1 as well. Which brings us to point 3.
3) In-demand star. Reynolds is highly in demand and very busy with many business ventures, a direct sequel is very hard even if it is largely a voice role and WB/Legendary may be wary to continue without him. Now I think that’s short-sighted and fairly illogical, but if Sonic 2 were to not star Jim Carrey, do you think Paramount would have gone ahead?
4) Legendary/WB falling out (pandemic). Probably an overlooked point is that the two studios behind the film had a public falling out a year later and have only recently began to make amends. More than anything this may have killed the momentum of any sequel plans.
12
u/MahNameJeff420 Jan 21 '25
I think part of it is that Sonic knows how to use it’s visual effects sparingly, whereas Detective Pikachu, due to having so many damn Pokémon, was forced into having heavier VFX, thus costing much more. Considering it opened right after Endgame, it did pretty well for itself. But based on return on investment, it didn’t make sequel money. I think they decided to quit while they were ahead and not dump even more money into something less people would care about.
→ More replies (2)
36
u/nicolasb51942003 WB Jan 21 '25
Considering Pokémon is undoubtedly the biggest media franchise in the world, WB didn’t think the performance was good enough to spawn a franchise as much as it was profitable.
Getting overshadowed by Endgame didn’t help and it was simply released in a crowded summer.
→ More replies (5)7
u/RepeatEconomy2618 Jan 21 '25
It didn't do well because of Endgame Hype, if it released in another month I guarantee it would've done way better
10
u/MatthewMaster16 Jan 21 '25
What do u mean `sonic of all things`? prob top 2 video games characters of all time
11
u/SilverRoyce Lionsgate Jan 21 '25
The owners of the Pokemon IP were very defensive around allowing a "true" pokemon adaptation and DP didn't do well enough to easily justify a big film franchise investment.
The fact that there's just less money being collected yearly in sonic IP makes risk of a sonic movie lower and the film did well enough to make a franchise. I think there's no way Sonic isn't helped by this run of films making a couple hundred million each but those same results for Pokemon might be seen as a warning sign especially given how well something like Mario did.
7
u/JohnnyKarateOfficial Jan 21 '25
Sonic goes fast in his movie. It's like Sonic as we know him.
Detective Pikachu is cute movie but it's not "Pokemon movie" its a "movie with Pokemon."
17
u/Daydream_machine Jan 21 '25
It wasn’t that great of a movie tbh, I watched it opening night but left feeling underwhelmed
→ More replies (11)
8
u/IcyInformation8239 Jan 21 '25
Came out at the worst time tbh. It was sandwiched between endgame Aladdin Godzilla and secret life of pets. Summer 2019 in general was super busy for movies. A lot of great movies got overshadowed at the box office. I still believe Detective pikachu is the best modern video game adaptation
6
u/Acceptable_Shine_738 Netflix Jan 21 '25 edited Jan 21 '25
Sonic was just more of a runaway success. Paramount likely didn’t have very high, unrealistic expectations for the films. I’m sure WB expected DP to make a lot more.
Plus Sonic had the advantage of being an origin story as well as the first movie of the series. Especially on the big screen. Pokemon has had theatrical films since the 90s
7
u/ManateeofSteel WB Jan 21 '25 edited Jan 21 '25
I see a lot of people dancing around the issue without going into it. The movie wasn't good enough, simple as that. Awesome setting, bad acting, mid writing. Nothing to write home about
35
u/Benjamin_Stark New Line Jan 21 '25
"It's apparent that Pokemon was the much better film."
Is it? I thought it was one of those movies where all the best moments are in the trailer. The film itself was bland and forgettable.
→ More replies (7)
6
u/critch Jan 22 '25 edited Feb 25 '25
gray wide rich fade safe innate hungry chop serious aromatic
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
6
u/Successful_Leopard45 A24 Jan 21 '25
Detective Pikachu is basically if the first Sonic movie was based of Tails Adventure. I still think a true mainline adaptation would do much better.
5
6
u/critch Jan 22 '25 edited Feb 25 '25
carpenter distinct safe act hobbies possessive dinosaurs wise ancient butter
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
9
u/CRoseCrizzle Jan 21 '25
Detective Pikachu outperformed the box office of each of the individual Sonic movies iirc, it's just that expectations were higher for Detective Pikachu than Sonic.
That said, it seems there hasn't been much desire to make a general Pokemon live action movie. One that's actually about what the games/show is about: being a pokemon trainer in the Pokemon world. I think a film like that would be a true test of Pokemon's brand in the world of cinema, not a half assed Detective Pikachu film(which is niche even amongst Pokemon fans).
→ More replies (3)
2
u/Flare_Knight Jan 21 '25
I think there's plenty of reasons you could chew on and any combination might be the right answer. Profit might be one. Sonic 1 was cut off by...the apocalypse and still made more domestically than Detective Pikachu. That's despite costing a good deal less than Detective Pikachu. It was a movie that had momentum due to the redesign recovery. Yes, Detective Pikachu brought in a good deal more internationally but studios generally get more out of the domestic box office results. Not to mention Sonic was the start of a new film franchise so there was lots of room for the story to evolve while Detective Pikachu felt like a one and done sort of thing. It's not, but it also clearly wasn't a priority since it's been 6 years and there's still no sequel.
Detective Pikachu might have also been a disappointment. Pokemon is colossal. I could easily see a great live action Pokemon movie doing Mario movie levels. They made money off that movie, but maybe it was just a disappointing result. While with Sonic that first movie did well and the sequels have been good steady profit.
Summarized, I think the result is due to expectations and timing. Sonic did way better than people expected at a time when Paramount was happy for a franchise to tap into. Pikachu did ok at a time when WB had other things going on. Joker was doing amazing, they were focused on superheroes, etc. There was motivation to keep Sonic going.
4
u/wmzer0mw Jan 21 '25
It was a fun movie but not better. Sonic was the better movie.
Most people watched Detective Pikachu to see the hyper realistic Pokemon, which was awesome.
4
7
u/gladias9 Jan 21 '25
Well I mean.. a simpler Pokemon movie about catching Pokemon and battling trainers would've probably hit better
→ More replies (3)
6
3
u/Mr_NotParticipating Jan 21 '25
Because it was a bad Pokémon movie. Funny movie, but bad Pokémon movie.
3
u/judgeholdenmcgroin Jan 22 '25
Lots of weird misinformation and omissions in this thread.
Detective Pikachu did $433M worldwide in its original release. The $450M figure people keep mentioning includes multiple re-releases https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr3275444741/
$93.7M of that was China. DP's gross outside of China was $340M. Comparatively, Sonic 1's worldwide gross excluding China was $317M. This is with COVID lockdowns happening within a month of Sonic 1's release.
Detective Pikachu had theatrical revenues hovering around $174M, off a budget put out in the trades of at least $150M. This is why there was no sequel. It would have cost more and they didn't see the kind of ROI that would have justified that. DP was so propped up by China that when the territory collapsed for American blockbusters, any potential sequel had a real shot at losing money.
4
u/renaissance_m4n Jan 21 '25 edited Jan 21 '25
Pokemon movie wasn’t fun and Sonic was.
Detective Pikachu is DARK and has no reason to be that dark for a kids movie (ditto’s eyes, noir murder mystery, basement Pokemon fights akin to illegal animal fights etc). Counter that with a ridiculously fun Carrey performance for Sonic and it’s a no-brainer which one my kids wanted to see more of.
4
u/ricksed Legendary Jan 21 '25
couple factors. One is budget. Detective Pikachu only made back so much of it's money. Sonic was much more profitable relative to what was spent that it got greenlit quickly for sequels.
Second, IP. Detective Pikachu was a project Nintendo/Pokemon tried out but didn't catch on. So they aren't invested in it anymore. Sonic games have been doing amazing with the movies. So Sega is heavily invested in the films and more projects for their other IP.
Third, overcoming challenges. Both sequels were developed in the challenging times of the pandemic. The Sonic production got more lucky managing all that.
Finally, subjective opinion. You say this was the better movie but that's simply your own opinion. In terms of legacy, Sonic movies are discussed way more than Detective Pikachu. It deserves credit for helping break the video game curse. But it doesn't leave much else for an impact
5
u/Lopsided_Parfait7127 Jan 21 '25
WDYM?
my family (adults and kids) have watched sonic multiple times because at core it's a fun road trip romp with low stakes and a lot of funny lines
they watched DP once and have never mentioned it since
as a sega fanboy, makes me extra happy to see genesis doing what nintendon't
→ More replies (4)
2
u/Survive1014 A24 Jan 21 '25
Busy release schedule and a very narrow subset of the overall Pokeman world.
2
u/erikaironer11 Jan 21 '25
I’d imagine is hard to get a sequel to Pokemon because it’s such a big brand owned by a very protective company. And with Pokemon being such a fluid IP that can essentially be any type of story maybe creators can’t agree on what to do next
2
u/littlelordfROY WB Jan 21 '25
Look at budget
Detective Pikachu had a 150M budget. It needed to be a bigger hit. Sonic was much closer to mid budget and didn't need the same blockbuster gross . Detective Pikachu still had way more global appeal
Maybe if it was a smaller movie in scale, it would not have needed 600M + numbers to look like a massive hit and its modest outcome would appear way more impressive.
Their worldwide grosses are not that different to be fair.
2
2
u/Nose_Standard Jan 21 '25
I'm a long time Pokémon fan, longer than I've even had a conscious memory even. My earliest memories are of playing on my Special Pikachu GBC.
I cannot look at these versions of the Pokemon without feeling unwell, "Detective Pikachu" makes it very clear that it's not confident enough to cover the core content of the franchise at large, and it feels attached to the anime more than the video games that kicked it off. It wasn't what I personally wanted from the series, and was probably too hyper-specific for the rest of the world too.
2
u/soliddd7 Jan 21 '25
I think some of the realistic designs didnt really hit target for the audience, altho I kind of like it.
2
u/andalusiandoge Jan 21 '25
Honestly? I think it's that the oldest people to grow up with Sonic are 5 years older than the oldest people to grow up with Pokemon and were more likely to have kids to bring to the theater.
I remember reading reviews of Detective Pikachu and every critic under 35 or so, whether they liked or disliked the movie, basically "got" it, while older critics were like "what the hell is this?"
2
Jan 22 '25
Ultimately, the Pokemon company doesn't feel a need to start an entire cinematic franchise. They're already the largest media franchise in the world without it. The profits from a movie series wouldn't do much for it. It's nice to have it but not necessary.
2
u/Lopsided_Let_2637 Jan 23 '25
What do you mean? Detective pikachu outgrossed every sonic movie. For a Pokémon movie, however, it underperformed bc the brand is extremely strong. Didn’t help that it got sandwiched by captain marvel and the biggest movie of all time
3
5
u/Vanillacherricola Jan 21 '25
The main actor was pretty weak in this movie. I like the fantastical-ness of the Pokémon world, but the human characters brought it down.
2
u/brucebananaray Jan 21 '25
I feel like it is hard due to how the movie ended from Detective Pikachu turning back to a human.
I feel like it will be more difficult to make a sequel.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
u/ElSquibbonator Jan 21 '25
What would a Detective Pikachu sequel even be about? It's not like they could turn Ryan Reynolds back into a Pikachu again.
2
u/RazgrizInfinity Jan 21 '25
It was really dedicated to the Detective Pikachu series, as well as the Pokemon being WAY too realisitc.
2
2
u/Adorable_Ad_3478 Jan 21 '25
Because Ash and his Pikachu were not the main characters.
The Pokemon anime >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Pokemon videogames when it comes to mainstream recognition. Many Pokemon Anime fans who buy their first mainline Pokemon game are surprised when they find out they can't play as Ash.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/longbrodmann Jan 21 '25
I think Detective Pikachu is like spin-off games of Pokemon and very experimental. Nintendo is also a very prudent company.
2
u/Resident_Bluebird_77 Searchlight Jan 21 '25
Develoment hell. At least 3 directors have been attached to direct a sequel but it pretty much stagnated at this point. Another possibility is that GameFreak is just no interest in making a sequel, Internal documents show that they're currently working on a live action series for Netflix and a non Detective Pikachu Pokemon film that's closer to the original source material
2
u/TalkingFlashlight Jan 21 '25
1) They adapted Detective Pikachu instead of the classic Kanto storyline with Ash, Pikachu, Misty, and Brock. Imagine a live-action film showing Ash getting Pikachu from Professor Oak! While Detective Pikachu was fun, it lacked core, recognizable characters like Sonic, Eggman, and Tails. Sure, you can’t fit all eight gym badges into one movie, but Ash’s story has plenty of other material beyond that journey.
2) With Sonic’s iconic characters, sequels are straightforward: “Here’s Tails, Knuckles, Shadow, and Amy.” Developing a Detective Pikachu sequel is trickier without a clear direction.
3) Sonic also had the distinct star power of Jim Carrey, whose viral performance as Eggman stole the show. Ryan Reynolds voiced Pikachu, but it didn’t have the same impact.
I love Detective Pikachu, but Sonic built a stronger foundation for a franchise.
→ More replies (3)
2
u/fringyrasa Jan 21 '25
There's a lot of things you can look at, but just a few things I wanna note here. While Detective Pikachu made 100 million more, they were both reviewed fairly close to each other and the fans were more forgiving of Sonic 1. The big issue for Detective Pkachu is they basically made a movie that felt more like a spin-off and after the first movie, there isn't really a blueprint for them to go for the 2nd one.
Sonic on the other hand, felt like a bit of a weird way to do the first movie, but it was still Sonic as the protagonist and Robotnik as the antagonist. Sonic 2 takes heavy inspiration from the games, as does Sonic 3 and it looks like that will keep up. The blueprint is for them to introduce a new main character from the video games each movie and take inspo from one of the games to formulate the script. It's why these movies will keep coming out every 2-3 years, especially with only needing a few live action actors.
There isn't really a blueprint for Detective Pikachu. It's based on a one off spin-off game and I'd reckon the writers don't really know how to push forward with a new story and they probably have gotten notes about wanting the movie to be closer to the games, as seen by Sonic's success.
So it's probably in developmental hell because they don't know how to make a sequel in an age where fans are responding more and more to video game adaptations that at least attempt to make an adaptation that fans can recognize. It would probably be best to just drop Detective Pikachu and instead try to find a way to adapt the games into a movie. It's a hard task with Pokemon. That's why it took so long for the movie to happen and why it'll probably be awhile till we see a new one.
2
u/MattWolf96 Jan 21 '25
As a Pokemon fan:
First of all it was released too close to Endgame, I still don't know what they were thinking with that even if Pokemon is big.
It took place in a pseudo cyberpunk setting, nobody thinks of that when they think of Pokemon they think of goofy adventures in the wilderness.
It being live action and looking pseudo realistic was just unappealing to a lot of people, some people thought it was ugly while others thought it was creepy.
Sonic has a franchise based around him, Pokemon isn't based around a particular character. The show did have Ash (who has ironically been retired now) but for the games you were always playing as different characters. Pikachu is the mascot but he usually doesn't talk apart from saying his name and just isn't comparable to Sonic as he's usually portrayed as more animal-like.
Detective Pikachu was an obscure spinoff game which took over two years to release worldwide which for modern games in that franchise is unusual (honestly I forgot that it even released outside Japan until I just researched it again.)
I actually kinda liked the movie but there were just a ton of weird choices made with it.
2
u/bendstraw Jan 21 '25
The cast was unremarkable and actually quite annoying, and the pokemon looked like nightmare fuel. I'm shocked how anyone thought it would make back its budget.
1
u/ConnorRoseSaiyan01 Jan 21 '25
Detective Pikachu is based on one specific game. Nothing that much can be done with that 1 specific premise
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Algae_Mission Jan 21 '25
A Pokémon Red adaptation or a film with Ash and Pikachu as the main characters would probably have resonated more.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Additional_Ice_358 Jan 21 '25
Honestly showing by Sonic 2 and 3’s number it has a very apparent ceiling. The only reason detective pikachu made so little is because everyone wanted a Pokémon journey, making friends and battling type of movie that we were used to seeing on the shows. They reinvent it like that and it goes into 600M + territory as Pokémon is a much larger fan base than sonic.
1
u/Chrizwald Jan 21 '25
It's almost always because it's about the person in the movie instead of the main character which is Pikachu
1
u/Coolboss999 Jan 21 '25
I am still waiting for the sequel to happen. We keep getting these small updates saying the sequel is still being written but nothing more than that.
1
u/Brief-Sail2842 Best of 2023 Winner Jan 21 '25
I do think that a Detective Pikachu sequel will happen eventually, but there are a lot of reasons why it hasn´t yet.
The ending makes it hard for a sequel to exist. Obviously you always can write a justification, but it´s hard to not make the premise feel forced (to many it will come off as a obvious cash grab).
Ryan Reynolds had a lot of other projects to do.
Paramount needed more Franchises, while WB/Legendary had Dune & the Monsterverse.
The Sonic movies are a lot cheaper than Detective Pikachu.
The Box Office was considered okay, but disappointing. It didn´t help that it was released in one of the busiest Box Office summers of All Time and got overshadowed by Endgame (Many Non Disney Films underperformed that year).
The feud between Legendary and WB during the Pandemic probably halted the early development of a sequel. We do know based on announcements and even the massive Pokemon leak from last year that the sequel was in development, but due to these circumstances development seems to not have progressed far.
While it was the first video game adaptation with mostly positive reviews, it did also have a fair share of mixed and underwhelming reactions as well. And there have been many other Video Game sucesses both in Film and TV, that have overshadowed this film.
The long wait between Films. It´s not new enough to be in people´s memory or old enough to capitalize off of nostalgia from the kids that grew up with it.
1
1.3k
u/HarlequinKing1406 Jan 21 '25
Probably because it was so hyperspecific to the Detective Pikachu game. A flat out Pokémon movie probably would have done that much better.