You're forgetting that Roger Corman is considered the modern king of B-movies. First of all he would never get a bigger budget because by and large his movies suck.
Dude, I know Corman's history. And if you read my first post on the matter, you'd know I said I HATE his movies. I was mostly noting that he with his tiny budget made a stronger attempt than Story et al to be true to the comics, which inherently was better than FF2005. Doom as ruler of Latveria was better than Doom, boy industrialist. Doom's costume (however cheaply made) was still better designed than the Salvation army outfit he's wearing in Story's film. He didn't give us Organic-Metal Doom. He didn't have Doom wanting to marry Sue. He didn't give us a Sue Storm too young for the character as written. He didn't give us a Sue & Johnny who didn't look like they grew up in the same neighborhood, let alone family. And he did give us a better looking unmasked Doom. A IMO perfect looking Sue an at least passable Johnny and Ben.
Corman, due to his tiny budget could have taken short cuts- altered the FF's story greatly, cast Tracy Lords as Sue or what have you. Nobody cared about this movie anyway. But despite his low budget (low? I should say non-existent) he still tried harder to give us Stan Lee & Jack Kirby's FF.
Second, the budget wasn't the only problem, more major problems were the script, the casting, the acting, and the pacing, to list a few.
And you're unaware that EVERY ONE of those complaints were lodged like boulders at FF '05? The script was a joke. There was no plot. Simply various excuses for special effects laden action scenes. No character development. Everyone merely did what they did "just because". Johnny was written as a scumbag. The comics Johnny would NEVER have humiliated Ben as the movie version did after HIS FRICKIN' WIFE DUMPED HIM. Sue & Reed only wound up together because they covered the romance end of the story, not out of a genuine building of affection between them.
Corman's script was paint by numbers, and silly at times. But Story's script was plain garbage.
And as far as Doom goes I think Culp way over-played his role. He wasn't menacing, just hammy and ridiculous. Though I agree he looked more like doom, even though he had little metal pieces glued to his black gloves instead of a pair of real gauntlets. While McMahon may not have been able to play the role the way it should have been played, he is overall a better actor and hopefully he's been given a better script and better direction this time.
Really, Marco Polo? I said, Culp was a better PHYSICAL DOOM. He looked better than McMahon for the role. And seeing as how both had bad scripts and poor direction you can't say that if given a better script and better direction Culp wouldn't have made a good Doom. McMahon certainly made for a poor one.
Again I say this- and TRY TO ACTUAL UNDERSTAND-
I'm saying switch the two budgets- give Corman 100 million bucks. IMAGINE how much better his sets could have been. Imagine that he could have hired better talent. Better costumers. Had a shooting schedule that allowed for more camera set-ups, more takes to get stronger performances.
Now- imagine Story's film without the expensive sets. With even lower salaried actors and crew. With even less time to shoot.
Which film is really better?
Yes I know Corman's movies suck. I avoid them like steaming piles of rhino ****. But I'm saying it this: Just like Paris Hilton is only beautiful
because she's rich, and there are very beautiful women out there that because they don't have money can't look as "polished' as she does, so too was FF '05's only saving grace, the money put behind it. And maybe Michael Chiklis.
I distinctly remember a few times where I was thinking "Oh yeah, they're kickin it." LOL 
