A new behind-the-scenes Sweet Tooth season 2 trailer reveals how the show avoids reliance on pure CGI, which dodges the “ugly” Sonic the Hedgehog problem. Contrasting its relatively dark source material, Netflix’s Sweet Tooth portrays a post-apocalyptic world where politics and propaganda run rampant but are balanced by traces of hope, love, and peace. The show ingeniously highlights this contrast by using a bright, lush color palette as the backdrop of its bleak world and a roster of cutesy half-human, half-animal characters who do not get caught in the uncanny chasm of extreme CGI.
Comparatively, Sonic the Hedgehog‘s initial character design was met with immense criticism and social media fury. The look of the movie version of the iconic Sega video game speedster was denounced for its strikingly human teeth, fingers, and narrow eyes, and was even touted as “an abomination.” Taking the overwhelming criticism seriously, Sonic‘s creators were quick to redesign the character and overturn the frenzy of memes coming their way. Sonic was not the first fictional movie character that fell deep into the uncanny valley of CGI, however. Cats‘ disturbing humanoid felines and The Polar Express‘ overly expressive animated characters received similar reactions and were unfortunately not able to reverse the damage.
With minimal CGI and more practical real-life character designs, Sweet Tooth completely avoids the uncanny valley problem. Most of its hybrid characters are played by child actors who mostly wear prosthetics, which grounds their appearance in reality. Sweet Tooth actor Christian Convery revealed (via YouTube) that Gus’s deer ears are real and their twitching movement is controlled by a puppeteer. What is all the more fascinating is that even Bobby, a human-groundhog hybrid with almost no human features, has been artificially created using a puppet system with hardly any CGI. As showcased on Twitter by showrunner Jim Mickle, Bobby’s torso and head are hooked to two poles, while his limbs are synced with the puppeteer’s feet. On paper, this approach may not seem any different from “ugly” Sonic’s hyper-realistic CGI, but as the show clearly establishes, it makes Bobby appear a lot more tangible and visually enjoyable.
Despite having an ostensibly similar design to Sonic, what works in Bobby’s favor is Sweet Tooth‘s unique interpretation of its source material. Instead of being extremely loyal to the comic books, Sweet Tooth only borrows themes, plotlines, and characters to create its own live-action universe. By keeping the character designs in tandem with its live-action world-building, the show avoids having inconsistencies in its visuals.
Sonic’s design, on the other hand, failed to impress because it retained most of its animated aspects from the original video games but only adopted some inconsistent human features that would befit the movie’s live-action setting. Sonic’s new appearance is still unrealistic for a live-action movie, but it is more acceptable because it conforms to how the character is culturally perceived. Meanwhile, Bobby’s design stays true to all the other elements of the series and, thereby, avoids triggering feelings of cognitive dissonance in viewers.
Although seemingly simple, the character designs in Sweet Tooth serve as a masterclass on how filmmakers can avoid creating a mismatch between the audience’s perception and expectations. The uncanny valley effect often benefits horror films, with Gremlins and Ex Machina being great examples. However, for shows and movies with a lighter tone, Sweet Tooth‘s seamless blend of realism and CGI can elicit a more positive emotional response from viewers.
