As I said- not THE SAME DRAMA. The same level. The FF have a different set of characters, a different story, a different villain. FF though the story is different, needs to hit the same level of marks.
I'm saying this again, I think ANY superhero fillm not dealing with an actual nuclear family would be hard pressed to approach that "level". There's something incredibly powerful about a mother begging for her children's lives. About a father who thinks his wife and kids are dead. This is a dynamic that is difficult to repeat elsewhere. "My brother is dead" doesn't carry quite the same dramatic weight, nor would/should Sue openly believe Doom, given Johnny's power levels.
While I certainly read, collect and treasure those issues, I didn't expect anything like that. That's the type of dialogue and relationship stuff that shouldn't be translated. Characters aren't written that way anymore. E-girl wasn't written that way.
I think to some extent, you do want some melodrama (Which THE INCREDIBLES featured). Or you'd appreciate the other stuff a bit more in the context of the Four's story.
As for the movie- What I expected to see was fleshed out stories. I expected to see more than the run-of-the-mill romance where the couple gets together because its in the script. I wanted to see some surprises.
Surprises in what regard?
Yes it was. That and the type of genre wasn't popular anymore. The types of films that were hits at that point were reality based and gritty (Godfather, Dog Day Afternoon, French Connection etc.).
That's arguable. Science fiction had always had it's fanbase. Studios balked at Lucas's original proposal because of the content and size, not the genre. It wasn't very "Hollywood", and it wasn't "safe". It was "movie serial", which yes, had gone out of fashion. He had to make it more Hollywood to get it made. The proof is in the changes made to the scripts over the years. Even as the films progressed he was changing things to make them more Hollywood, kid-friendly, or what have you.
I'm addressing your point about Slave Girl Leia. I'm saying it wasn't pandering, since it hadn't been anything like that in the first two and no one cared. It was a character moment. Jabba wasn't going to have Leia wearing in a long dress.
And I'm saying the Sue scene isn't pandering. It's exploring a real issue.
Scripts usually have multiple drafts. Lucas said in fact that the script was many times longer than what we got, but he knew he couldn't afford to shoot it all.
It wasn't just longer, it was WAYYY different. I'm not referring to the STAR WARS script he did once he had a studio. I'm referring to his originals, which no studio wanted.
But you can easily see that those changes weren't due to studio pressure.
Go read the original draft of THE STARKILLER (The concept Lucas tweaked when it was rejected that later became Star Wars). See if you still believe that.
The story is built around a young Luke.
Not originally. The story was built around an older, grizzled veteran commander with a dark past, and a young character out for simple revenge because someone killed his father and brother. It's much, much darker than the STAR WARS we ended up getting, although not nearly as thematically good. And about eight other characters, and Darth Vader, who was, in Lucas' original version, a freaking joke of a supporting character (Think Grand Moff Tarkin but lame), and a complete pushover, in some ways.
This also lends itself to classic literature and mythology about the Hero's Journey. Han Solo is the dashing badboy. His being an alien wouldn't have worked, particularly considering the romance with Leia.
Exactly. Which is why Han Solo became human. Han Solo wasn't a dashing badboy when Lucas began shopping STAR WARS. He was Greedo the alien in the original. Him being a grotesque alien wouldn't have worked because of HOLLYWOOD, not because of the material itself. Worked fine in the original story. Might have been interesting.
First, Sue is NEVER portrayed that way in the Silverage stuff.
So Sue just HAPPENS to be a gorgeous, perky blonde? People just HAPPEN to fall for her beauty, and comment on her beauty, and so forth? Villains just happen to want to carry her off? Not buying it, sorry. Some things are just inherent to a character and her place in the mythology. Sue's attractiveness is one of them.
Second, you need to watch the scene again. That strategy got them nowhere. The Torch had to finally attempt to fly over to Ben and this started all of the other things that made the crowds disperse like the helicopter going haywire and the cars flying. And they never actually get to Ben until he's lifted the firetruck back onto the bridge and the police train their guns on him.
I think you need to watch the scene again. Their efforts succeed on several levels, and the scene advances the story and their development as heroes to boot.
Third, it shows what a totally ineffective leader Reed is as he suggests that failed strategy.
Failed strategy? Put yourself in Reed's shoes. There's a massive crowd AND cops holding people back that are between them and the situation, which is bound to be serious given the pileup, and involves Ben.
Reed is, at this point unaware of the extent of their powers, and NONE of them have superstrength (push through the crowd) or X-Ray Vision or clairvoyance. They want to find out what's going on over there, and with their friend. They need to get past the cops and through the crowd. Sue can create a distraction for the cops, and an invisible force moving through the throng, and the others will follow while the onlookers are stunned at what they've just witnessed.
Is it complex? No. But it is a pretty decent plan, and it clearly does work. Their plan is to get past the cops, and they do. In fact, they arrive almost right where Ben is, finding him fairly quickly, which was their aim. And getting past those cops puts them in the position to SAVE LIVES, which they do.
So how, pray tell, is this a failed strategy? What would you have had Reed do?
They have a reason to wear the suits regardless. They're more effective for fighting in and more durable than regular clothes, even if treated with the unstable molecules. And weakening Sue's invisible field isn't more interesting IMO. Using it as it is in the comics creates lots more possibilities for action scenes.
But now they have a thematically RELEVANT reason for wearing the classic suits. Not only do the suits reflect the event that changed their lives, they also reflect how THEY were changed in the event, and allow them to BECOME their new selves. That's a hell of a lot better concept than "more durable clothing".
Sue did use her forcefield as she did in the comics, and in action scenes later on, as her powers DEVELOPED and she became more confident with them. The filmmakers simply implied that the field doesn't affect her CLOTHES right away (It could in FF2, as she learns to control it better). It's not absurd that she can't project the field over her clothes so early in the game. She barely knows WHAT her power is, let alone how to use it to its full effect.
Then they could've shown her forcefield fail. There was only one reason to get Jessica naked.
She wasn't naked, she was in her underwear. Not only did the sequence showcase her powers voilatile nature, but it showcased the invisible effects, too.
Marvel didn't really begin using those tactics in a sexual way until the 70's. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Sexual elements have always been there. They may not always have been blatant, as times were a little different back then in some regards, but they were always there. And if, as you claim, that stuff has only been around since the 70's, then they'd still have been around for 30 plus years. More than enough time to become an accepted part of the character and the mythology.
Obviously they need to keep the key elements. But at the same time, they have to adapt things. My gripe is in the way the adapted them. That's where they showed a lack of imagination. The handling of the characters, the action, the structure of the story.
Elaborate, please. Did you think it wasn't bombastic enough? Grand enough?
You think Johnny was intense? He was a superficial moron. He didn't even display his legendary hot-headedness. He was too busy trying to be cool.
He was pretty intense about being superficial and devil-may-care. I would describe that as intense, yes, as "intense" means "Possessing or displaying a distinctive feature to an extreme degree". Which Johnny certainly did.
Anything can be translated if you know what you're doing.
Sue: Johnny- What the hell are you doing?
Johnny: Just lettin' off some steam sis- In my own inimitable fashion-
Sue: This isn't a joke- We still don't know the limits of these powers- how far you can fly before you burn out- how hot you can burn before you lose control of it..
Johnny: There's only one way to find out- and it ain't it Reed's lab.
Sue: Are you CRAZY?
Johnny: VERY- (Starts to take off)-
Sue projects a force field in his path.
Johnny: Is this how you're going to win every argument? Look, Sue- We don't know what's gonna happen to us- if these powers are going to last forever or for another day. If they're gonna protect us or kill us. Well, if I'm going out this is the way I want it- blazin' like a frickin' comet - Not a rat in Richards' lab. Good or bad, that's how it's gotta be.
Sue: There's another way of looking at it.. Maybe these powers are a gift- maybe we have a destiny.. And that's more than blazing across the sky. We gained them together- We've got to stick together now and learn how to use them. Whatever our destiny is- we're four links in chain..
Sue's words have struck a chord in Johnny. He pauses as they sink deep. Then a wave of defiance runs over him. He turns away.
Johnny: I'll see you later.
He takes off. Sue begins to stop him but decides against it.[/quote]
So essentially, she's still *****y and domineering except for two sentences when she becomes preachy.
So in that entire scene...nothing changes for Johnny. And it really only rehashes what we SAW in the movie. That Johnny already regards the powers as a gift (he knows he can save lives with them, he's just enjoying the celebrity that comes along with it). And Sue wants him to do the right thing.
And how do you show it? By having him say what he knows, or actually doing something?
Both. In the case of scientific, saying something IS often "doing", because its demonstrating you have the knowledge of scientific principles. That's often how you DO science. Science isn't all about inventing, and neither is Reed Richards. But science can be about theorizing, testing and explaining, and Reed did plenty of that.
Besides, they began the movie with him actually doing something, explaining the cosmic cloud.
Any number of astronomers could do that. If we're supposed to be connected with Reed he has to show us something special.
That's because a lot of astronomers are incredibly intelligent peope. Does that change the fact that Reed is portrayed as incredibly intelligent? You seem to be upset because he's only said to be the Smartest Man in the World, when clearly he may well be deserving of that title. But I know, I know, you wanted the Negative Zone.
It isn't that he didn't have the power. He didn't CALCULATE the correct amount of power. He failed again.
What exactly are you talking about? Go back and watch that scene again.
Reed uses machine...machine messes him up. Sue comes to his aid.
REED: I can make it work. I need...more power...to control the storm.
VON DOOM: More power?
The next scene shows Doom, who HAS more power at his control, making the machine WORK. How? By tapping into the entire city's power supply.
No, Reed didn't miscalculate, friend. He simply couldn't generate the power needed to control the storm. This was explained within the movie. Or else why was Doom POWERING the machine?
"He couldn't generate enough power for the machine to reach critical mass...yet another mistake for Mr. Fantastic" (I'm not sure how this is a mistake. It's a power issue. I fail to see how the machine not having enough power put into it to control a NATURAL, FREAK OCCURRENCE is a mistake.
Where was it tested? Some bickering that they quickly forgot about?
His basic nature had to change to get Sue. How do you want it to be tested, exactly? Namor carry her off and Reed fight to win her back?
He didn't need to be the sexy type. A man should be sexy with the woman he loves and loves him. Particularly when an audience has to sit through it.
He was, more or less. Just not flashy about it. I thought he was very sexy, and very passionate, and so did a LOT of women who saw the film. Ioan's got something about him that just oozes sometimes.
Okay... But we did need to insert the occasional lingerie shot, right? As for mutual intelligence....WHA? Mutual needs? What were they?
Newsflash. I see my fiancee in lingerie sometimes, and it makes me reflect on "us". Lingerie happens. So do embarassing moments. And sometimes, people become more attracted to each other because of such moments.
I told you. Reed had issues with assertiveness and interpretation and overanalyzation. Issues that fit his character like a glove. Sue was a bit headstrong and old fashioned. She didn't want to have to explain to Reed what she wanted. In the end, she decided she wanted him badly enough to do so.
And again- it doesn't matter that Incredibles dealt with a marriage. FF should have taken an equally interesting route in dealing with Reed and Sue rekindling their romance, including creating obstacles.
Such as? Namor? Sue thinking Reed is ugly? Them bickering more, or not seeing eye to eye on their powers? What?
Right, they didn't sell the relationships I wanted to see. Interesting ones.
What would make them more interesting to you?
Shared experiences. Being able to relate to each other as superbeings. Similar sense of bravery. Both have lived high-adrenaline lives. Both want more than those lives offered.
That's pretty generic, don't you think? (Playing Devil's Advocate here, btw)
So, Reed doesn't understand her, he's insecure and overthinks things. He's not sexy or romantic. But he's noble. He's strong? He's sweet?
A LOT of men and women don't understand the opposite sex, and a lot of men AND women are insecure. And some people overanalyze things, and it causes problems. It's relevant.
Doesn't sound like the makings of a good relationship
So then, what, people have to be perfect to have a good relationship?
Plain and simple. Those things were there the way Galactus is "there" in this new movie. Glossed over, portrayed without any sign of skill, depth, mood or sense of style.
Which "things"? Those aspects of Reed? No, they were pretty explicity shown AND stated. Galactus is a whole other issue entirely. I'm guessing they're saving him for the SILVER SURFER movie. But even given the "cloud" and "hint", I don't think you can say they didn't have any semblance of mood, tone, or thought to the appearance. They thought about what Galactus IS, that much I can see, and they did their best to make it palpable.
