Along with these changes will it include making Thing look right?

[Wilhelm-Scream]

P.S., that is a super disturbing picture. He looks like a pox-ridden feral freak.

 

[Malus]

Just a thought, but I'll bet if Chiklis himself asked for the brow, Fox might just give it more consideration.
Anybody got a fan mail address for Michael Chiklis?

 

[Tony Stark]

Do you have a source that says the decision was made to use the money on the other 3? We do know from Story that he ran out of time on the cgi....but i don't remember reading anywhere where they said that they made the decision to spend the money on the other 3....i could be wrong, but i've never read that i don't believe...

No I don't have a source but it's pretty obvious. He's comparing Gollem and King Kong. Gollem was the major special effect in The Two Towers, and his work likely ate a good share of the effects budget. As I've said 2000 times before, the majority of the effects shots in TLOTR movies were practical effects, which is one reason why the movie looks so amazing. They used miniture photography, models, forced perspective, etc., etc. They were using methods that have been around for ages which is why they made the two towers with only a 95 million dollar budget.

King Kong had twice that budget, and there were alot more CGI shots than Lord of the Rings. Spider-man had 150 million and a 200 million dollar budget for those films.

Yes some of the effects shots were delayed in FF, and it got a boost in the budget to help complete some of the work. But it was planned all along to save the effects shots for Reed, Johnny and Sue.

Spider-man 2 the decision was made to have most of Doc Ock's tentacle effects, practicle effect, and you saw how effective it was in the film. Most of the time you see Ock, especially in close up shots, those are real tentacles, operated by a puppeteer. The CGI was saved for shots like Doc scaling the wall with Aunt May, or Ock walking on his tentacles, or the train fight scene, where pupeteering is not possible, but the closeups are almost all practical effects.

 

[Malus]

Yes some of the effects shots were delayed in FF, and it got a boost in the budget to help complete some of the work. But it was planned all along to save the effects shots for Reed, Johnny and Sue.

And that was a near-fatal mistake.
It's always been fairly obvious (to most) that Ben Grimm is the star of Fantastic Four. He's easily the favorite character for most fans, with the Torch ranking a fairly distant second. Ben has dominated the covers of FF for well over 40 years for a reason. He's certainly more interesting visually than Reed or Sue, and he sells comics. Sales figures over the years show that issues with Thing-centric covers sell much better. This was particularly true before the direct market (and non-returnability) came along, back when sales were tracked by the number of returns received on an issue. That's why you see a whole lot of FF covers in the 1970's that feature Ben almost exclusively, or sometimes with Ben in the action and little inset heads of Reed, Sue and Johnny "looking on." Torch and Thing covers sold well, too. But readers always snatched up Thing-centric covers in greater numbers.
This info, by the way, came to my ears directly from the mouth of Stan Lee in 1978. A few years later, at the height of his FF popularity, I heard John Byrne say the same thing when a fan asked why Ben dominated so many covers: "He sells comics."
A properly done Thing would have made the first film an even bigger hit -and greatly reduced the moaning and giggling in fandom that started with the first images they released and that continues to this day. The Thing in FF1 barely made the cut (in my opinion) and if they want to really wow audiences in FF2 and beyond they'll start evolving him.
Story says we're going to get a "full-on" Doom this time.
I just hope they're considering what it will take to start moving Chiklis towards a "full-on" Thing.

Spider-man 2 the decision was made to have most of Doc Ock's tentacle effects, practicle effect, and you saw how effective it was in the film. Most of the time you see Ock, especially in close up shots, those are real tentacles, operated by a puppeteer. The CGI was saved for shots like Doc scaling the wall with Aunt May, or Ock walking on his tentacles, or the train fight scene, where pupeteering is not possible, but the closeups are almost all practical effects.

Yes, I agree, it was quite effective.
And there's no reason why they couldn't do this with Chiklis. Show him in close-up a lot, with only minimal CGI enhancement, then layer CGI over him for full body shots. As far as I'm concerned, there could be half as many full body shots of him - if they work.
Again, I don't want to lose Chiklis' face in all this. I don't want a Hulk-type effect; I want Chiklis' great performance incorporated into a Hulk-type effect.
I think it can and should be done.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

As with the "Wolverine didn't wear a mask", the "practical Dr. Octopus tentacles" is a non-point. Completely irrelevant. Here's why, though I can't believe I'd even have to point it out.

The tentacles are MECHANICAL DEVICES. That means a simulation can be fabricated out of whatever material and then puppeteered.

The reason the Thing had to be CGI is that, for the millionth time, The thing is bi-pedal, and humanOID, but he doesn't. have. human. proportions.

So, unlike practical tentacles, you can't fabricate and puppeteer a CHIKLIS BODY. He's got one body, and that's what you have to work with, and his body-type isn't Thingish. No human's is.

Again, the burden is on the producers and artists involved in the film to bring the comic to life, just like they give Superman red boots and make it appear that he's flying, just like the Balrog had a whip made out of fire, even though fire-whips don't exist in real life.


Another reason he HAD to be CGI, is that the nature of the comicbook character is impossible in real life, hence the crappiness of the costume. He has a rocky hide, he's supposed to have rock-hard skin, but rock isn't flexible. ANY time a human moves, it has to be flexible at the joints, and that flexibility will look rubbery.

CGI is the only way you can make the impossible appear to happen here, by mathematically fudging, making each "rock" in his skin act as scales, or pebbles, adhering to one another with a complex and flexible interaction with eachother, like a pile of nugget-shaped magnets, moveable, but always connected.

Totally impossible with the same technology they used to make Godzilla back in the 50's.

 

[terry78]

^I do agree in that respect. The Thing shouldn't even be able to fit into normal doorways. He's not the tallest guy, but he is wide.

 

[Kelly]

Just a thought, but I'll bet if Chiklis himself asked for the brow, Fox might just give it more consideration.
Anybody got a fan mail address for Michael Chiklis?

They cut a funny scene out of the movie where Thing goes through the door....as was much of the really good stuff, this was cut as well...

 

[Malus]

The reason the Thing had to be CGI is that, for the millionth time, The thing is bi-pedal, and humanOID, but he doesn't. have. human. proportions.

I think writer/artist John Byrne described it best 20 years ago: "Ben isn't shaped like a human. He's shaped more like a starfish."
(No Spongebob & Patrick jokes, please.)

 

[Kelly]

I think writer/artist John Byrne described it best 20 years ago: "Ben isn't shaped like a human. He's shaped more like a starfish."
(No Spongebob & Patrick jokes, please.)

I still think, and always will that it won't come down to money, it won't come down to what Chiklis or Story wants, it won't come down to anything but time....from listening to the commentary, and what I've seen he may have a problem with organizing and time....it seems alot of time, energy and money was wasted on the first movie.....hopefully this won't happen in the sequel.

 

[Vartha]

Big brow ? Small nose ? Unless you're making The Thing cg, isn't happening. Chilkis will be in that thing again. The head should look the same. They can work on the hands, and the body, but you can't take away from the emotions of the face. And if you gave him a big brow you'd take away from that. As far as a button nose, I don't think Chilkisis nose is that small. So the head stays as is.

This is something both the thing and I have agreed on in the past, there's no way to make the Thing look the way everyone wants him to look.
You have to start from the begining in 1961 and work your way forward with Ben's look today.
I personally think they did a Great job on Ben and they should leave it.

 

[w@llcrawler]

I watched FF again last night and I saw something else that shone a "bad" light on the Thing. When Doom throws him through the air and he lands on the car...a 700 lb. boulder crashing from the air onto the hood of a car should crush it instantly and bring it to a stop. In the movie? The car keeps going, the Thing with his "rock like body" sliding back and forth like he is really made of...foam rubber! He hops of the hood and the SMALL indention pops back out to normal! Can't believe I never noticed this before but its even subliminal things like that that diminish the film Thing's power and presence. They need to do better.

 

[Malus]

You have to start from the begining in 1961 and work your way forward with Ben's look today.
I personally think they did a Great job on Ben and they should leave it.

If they should work forward, why should they leave it?

The FF1 Thing looks somewhat like the comics Thing did for maybe the first two years of the comic and that's it. He evolved in the comics and he should evolve in the movies; into the more monstrous, browed character we're all familiar with.

 

[Kelly]

I watched FF again last night and I saw something else that shone a "bad" light on the Thing. When Doom throws him through the air and he lands on the car...a 700 lb. boulder crashing from the air onto the hood of a car should crush it instantly and bring it to a stop. In the movie? The car keeps going, the Thing with his "rock like body" sliding back and forth like he is really made of...foam rubber! He hops of the hood and the SMALL indention pops back out to normal! Can't believe I never noticed this before but its even subliminal things like that that diminish the film Thing's power and presence. They need to do better.

Yeah some others saw that as well...

 

[Malus]

I watched FF again last night and I saw something else that shone a "bad" light on the Thing. When Doom throws him through the air and he lands on the car...a 700 lb. boulder crashing from the air onto the hood of a car should crush it instantly and bring it to a stop. In the movie? The car keeps going, the Thing with his "rock like body" sliding back and forth like he is really made of...foam rubber! He hops of the hood and the SMALL indention pops back out to normal! Can't believe I never noticed this before but its even subliminal things like that that diminish the film Thing's power and presence. They need to do better.

In my mind it's a tie between this scene and "Marco Polo" as the film's worst moments.

 

[w@llcrawler]

In my mind it's a tie between this scene and "Marco Polo" as the film's worst moments.

I think the worst for me was when Victor says, "This is going to be fun!" in a very un-Doom like tone!

 

[Vartha]

If they should work forward, why should they leave it?

The FF1 Thing looks somewhat like the comics Thing did for maybe the first two years of the comic and that's it. He evolved in the comics and he should evolve in the movies; into the more monstrous, browed character we're all familiar with.

What I should have said was try to change the face alittle as each movie comes out, but if they change the body, don't make it look like a "starfish".
I can see ailttle more bulk added to the body by cgi, but, then people will nit pick that too.
Like I said, You can't please everyone all the time, at least the movies are being made.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

What I should have said was try to change the face alittle as each movie comes out, but if they change the body, don't make it look like a "starfish".
I can see ailttle more bulk added to the body by cgi, but, then people will nit pick that too.
Like I said, You can't please everyone all the time, at least the movies are being made.

I can't remember the exact quote or where I saw it, but I seem to remember Tim Story once made a statement that at least hinted the Thing's look might evolve in the films as it did in the Comics.

Can anyone else remember what I'm thinking of, or - better yet - find the actual quote?

 

[Kelly]

He might can be drawn in a starfish shape in the comics, but make him look more starfish on the big screen and everyone will call him spongebob's brother....

 

[Malus]

He might can be drawn in a starfish shape in the comics, but make him look more starfish on the big screen and everyone will call him spongebob's brother....

Now what did I say?

I think writer/artist John Byrne described it best 20 years ago: "Ben isn't shaped like a human. He's shaped more like a starfish."
(No Spongebob & Patrick jokes, please.)

 

[Kelly]

Now what did I say?

I KNOOOOOOOW.....but when people tell me NOT TO DO SOMETHING....well....you know the rest......

 

[Malus]

I KNOOOOOOOW.....but when people tell me NOT TO DO SOMETHING....well....you know the rest......

In that case, do NOT pay my mortgage. I mean it, now.

 

[Kelly]

In that case, do NOT pay my mortgage. I mean it, now.

After I pay mine....

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

at least the movies are being made.

Doesn't do me any good because the movie was so bad I had to leave the theater from embarrassment. I even bought the DVD and have never been able to watch it all the way through, I skip to the 3 or 4 good parts.

And it is the only movie where every single one of my friends refused to go see it with me because they said it looks like a waste of time. However we all went together to see all the Lord of the Rings movies, all of the Star Wars prequels, and I went with 2 or more of them to Land of the Dead, Spider-Man 1+2 ( twice ), all the Blade movies, Batman Begins (twice ), War of the Worlds, both Kill Bills, The Hulk.......we always go to movies, but not a single one wanted to see F4, and all they knew about it was that they saw the USA Today with the Thing on the cover and said it looked ridiculous, withOUT me saying a word.

 

[Kelly]

Doesn't do me any good because the movie was so bad I had to leave the theater from embarrassment. I even bought the DVD and have never been able to watch it all the way through, I skip to the 3 or 4 good parts.

And it is the only movie where every single one of my friends refused to go see it with me because they said it looks like a waste of time. However we all went together to see all the Lord of the Rings movies, all of the Star Wars prequels, and I went with 2 or more of them to Land of the Dead, Spider-Man 1+2 ( twice ), all the Blade movies, Batman Begins (twice ), War of the Worlds, both Kill Bills, The Hulk.......we always go to movies, but not a single one wanted to see F4, and all they knew about it was that they saw the USA Today with the Thing on the cover and said it looked ridiculous, withOUT me saying a word.

Wow, all my friends wanted to go see it, and they made sure I was with them....hmmmmm....I guess different types of friends for different types of people uh?

 

[Mr Sensitive]

Doesn't do me any good because the movie was so bad I had to leave the theater from embarrassment. I even bought the DVD and have never been able to watch it all the way through, I skip to the 3 or 4 good parts.

And it is the only movie where every single one of my friends refused to go see it with me because they said it looks like a waste of time. However we all went together to see all the Lord of the Rings movies, all of the Star Wars prequels, and I went with 2 or more of them to Land of the Dead, Spider-Man 1+2 ( twice ), all the Blade movies, Batman Begins (twice ), War of the Worlds, both Kill Bills, The Hulk.......

It doesn't do me any good either.

I'd rather have a much better movie, a true Fantastic Four movie, with less BO than that crap wrapped up in money for Fox's greedy hands.