Dear God. Stick To The Source Material

[Advanced Dark]

I'm not referring to what it lacked I'm just referring how it was handled. I don't have time to explain it right now but they wanted to make sure it was suitable to everyone and the really over sanitized it.

 

[highguard]

We are getting a sequel because it made a large enough profit, that does not in any way equal "it worked...."

Unless you are of the lot that if it makes money it is a great movie....I don't happen to agree with that.....but I am glad that they are getting a second chance.....unfortunately my trust in Fox to be able to make a "great" movie is alittle weak at the moment...

On this I have to disagree with you. I don't agree with some of the changes that they made but i am afraid to tell you this but the defining characteristic of a big budget summer movie is the box office return.

Now we may not like this but that is what these movies are made for, they are tentpoles and they are designed to bring in the money.

Right now hollywood is into comic book adaptations because they are generating amazing business. Now second tier characters like Ghost Rider are bringing in the cash as well. And look at 300.

Now having said that we as fans that are familiar with the source material have different criteria for determining success, but we should not be so presumptious as to think that our criteria rules all, it just is not so albafan.

 

[Malus]

On this I have to disagree with you. I don't agree with some of the changes that they made but i am afraid to tell you this but the defining characteristic of a big budget summer movie is the box office return. .

I don't think box office success is a reliable indicator of whether or not a film worked on an artistic level. Maybe to the studios.

Now having said that we as fans that are familiar with the source material have different criteria for determining success, but we should not be so presumptious as to think that our criteria rules all, it just is not so albafan.

I don't think Albafan is being presumptuous at all. I love the FF, but I can barely stand to watch the first film.

 

[highguard]

I don't think box office success is a reliable indicator of whether or not a film worked on an artistic level. Maybe to the studios.



I don't think Albafan is being presumptuous at all. I love the FF, but I can barely stand to watch the first film.

i understand what you are saying Malus but I think that we have different criteria for determining if a movie works. The studios have their take, and so do the fans. AD said it worked and Albafan said it did not.

I think that they are both right with qualifications. For the studios BO is more important than artistic license and interpretation, particularly with summer tentpole movies.

We the fans think if the movie resonates with us at a deep and meaningful level and is faithful to the source material then we are happy.

Now whose view is correct, whose is more valid. When we and the studios both get what we want we are all happy but one thing is certain if the movie does not make its money back, the franchise or its success is considered dead.

I think there must be a balance or movies are going to be really bad, but as much as we may not like it BO is extremely important, because if it does not work to the extent that these movies have general mass appeal and the return on investment is good they will not be considered to have worked by the studio.

Movies that have 100 million plus budgets must generate similar returns, it is just the nature of the beast.

 

[Nokio]

Don't hold your breath.

 

[HoratioRome]

i understand what you are saying Malus but I think that we have different criteria for determining if a movie works. The studios have their take, and so do the fans. AD said it worked and Albafan said it did not.

I think that they are both right with qualifications. For the studios BO is more important than artistic license and interpretation, particularly with summer tentpole movies.

We the fans think if the movie resonates with us at a deep and meaningful level and is faithful to the source material then we are happy.

Now whose view is correct, whose is more valid. When we and the studios both get what we want we are all happy but one thing is certain if the movie does not make its money back, the franchise or its success is considered dead.

I think there must be a balance or movies are going to be really bad, but as much as we may not like it BO is extremely important, because if it does not work to the extent that these movies have general mass appeal and the return on investment is good they will not be considered to have worked by the studio.

Movies that have 100 million plus budgets must generate similar returns, it is just the nature of the beast.

true but there is one more element to consider.
but first let's acknowledge that you are correct.
there is no doubt that as far as hollywood is concerned the BO is the end all be all of the game. However, there have been a few movies that made TONS of money which are considered to have "failed"; even in Hollywood.
Both Matrix reloaded and revolution made twice as much as the first, but they are not considered to be on par with the first. The same can be said of Star wars episode 1,2, and perhaps 3.
now I'm sure that "hollywood" doesn't care cause they got their money, but it does affect their ability to generate more money through future sequels.
Remember, the last Batman movies actually made a lot of money but almost ruined the Superhero movie franchise.
so it does matter.
Now the thing to consider is this.
there are successes and there are successes. It is true that FF, Hulk, DD, X-men, and SMR all were "successful" in the sense that they generated enough money to make a profit. This allows for sequels to be made. However, I am of the opinion that these movies "failed" in spite of this because they missed out on the money they SHOULD have made.
If these movies were well accepted they easily could have made an additional 100 million dollars each. easily, so in many ways, not doing so is a failure.
Hollywood understands this for other movies, but they don't seem to get that for superhero movies. In spite of the evidence, I think they still consider comic movies to be such crap that they just don't quite believe in them yet. That's why they are always trying to change the source material to "make them better".
the proof is in the pudding. Spider-man which is the closest to the comics made more than TWICE as much as the next superhero movie.
I hope with 300 that they finally accept what Frank Miller said, that "it's pretty obvious that the more you stick to the source material the more successful the movies are".

it may be too late for FF2 though

 

[HoratioRome]

Galactus is not needed?? WTF! No way are you a true fan of the f4. NO WAY IN THE NAME OF THE ALMIGHTY SHOULD ANYONE MAKE A F4 FILM FEATURING THE FIRST APPEARENCE OF THE SILVER SURFER WITHOUT GALACTUS!! There should be no SS without Galactus, and i'm not talking about some crappy purple cloud, or a bunch of insect looking ships posing as Galactus. IF FOX AND THE REST OF THAT SO CALLED CREATIVE TEAM ISN'T GOING TO USE GALACTUS WHEN PUTTING THE SS IN THE MOVIE THEN THEY SHOULDN'T BE MAKING A F4 FILM AT ALL.

150 million is a lot of money, but as fox showed with the 1st F4 they seem to have no concept of appling and utilizing such a massive amount of money. I have no idea where FOX spent the so called 100 plus million on the 1st F4, but it wasn't on that movie. If anyone can break it down to me and show me where all that money went, then i'd be grateful. the first f4 looked liked it cost about 60-70 million if that. The sets looked so so, and I don't need to go on. Acoording to Black Enterprise Magazine, the budget is at 130 million.

As for spiderman, well I can see why those films are a huge success. They may have made some changes, but they stuck to the source material and didn't half @ss anything. F42 may be entertianing, but if they aren't sticking to the source material, then the film won't be a good film. If F42 is good I'd be surprised.

WELL SAID!!! BRAVO!!

I'm telling you, there something fishy about AD. no way is that guy a FF fan. No WAY!
MOLE perhaps but FF fan? NO WAY

 

[HoratioRome]

Question to everyone. If doom and or "Galactus" have already been designed and the scenes have already been shot, what is the delay in showing us what they look like?
They've shown us the FF, they've shown us Silver Surfer, so what's the problem?
I've asked this before but I would like to ask again,....for those who support this movie franchise and who come up with excuses for the obvious screw ups and failures, is there ANYTHING that would make you say, no way in FF2?
AD I'm talking to you if "full Doom" doesn't look like DOOM, will you admit that it's crap.

 

[Malus]

WELL SAID!!! BRAVO!!

I'm telling you, there something fishy about AD. no way is that guy a FF fan. No WAY!
MOLE perhaps but FF fan? NO WAY

Of course he's a fan! He owns stock in Marvel!

Hey, I used to own a ton of Marvel stock about 10 years ago.
Know what happened to it?

And yes, AD, I know that what I bought stock in back then was "a different company" and that the collapse and bankruptcy of Marvel in 1997 was largely the fault of good ol' Ron Perelman.

 

[Carp Man]

Question to everyone. If doom and or "Galactus" have already been designed and the scenes have already been shot, what is the delay in showing us what they look like?
They've shown us the FF, they've shown us Silver Surfer, so what's the problem?
I've asked this before but I would like to ask again,....for those who support this movie franchise and who come up with excuses for the obvious screw ups and failures, is there ANYTHING that would make you say, so way in FF2?
AD I'm talking to you if "full Doom" doesn't look like DOOM, will you admit that it's crap.

Ok. Enough is enough. Who the hell is apoligizing for the screwups, and failures. The writing sucked. Frost should be drawn and quartered. Doom sucked. The dialog sucked. Avi sucks. Story sucks. Winter sucks. Marvel sucks. Happy now ? Good lord have mercy. Get the hell off it. I guess you wanted to seethe flying hot tub, and beating the commies into space ? Some things had to be changed. Some for the better, some for the worse, and some were just plain screwups. There, that should satisify your blood lust craving.

 

[Malus]

Ok. Enough is enough. Who the hell is apoligizing for the screwups, and failures. The writing sucked. Frost should be drawn and quartered. Doom sucked. The dialog sucked. Avi sucks. Story sucks. Winter sucks. Marvel sucks. Happy now ? Good lord have mercy. Get the hell off it. I guess you wanted to seethe flying hot tub, and beating the commies into space ? Some things had to be changed. Some for the better, some for the worse, and some were just plain screwups. There, that should satisify your blood lust craving.

Hey, I like Winter.

Oh. You mean Ralph Winter.

 

[Carp Man]

Hey, I like Winter.

You know me. I go off on people who want to continue to beat a dead horse. The 1st movie is done, over and finished. It was not all it should have, or could have been. That is not a disputed fact. $ 330.3 in WW box office speaks volums. Not many here thought it could push to that lofty hight. People enjoyed the movie, and the sequel will make up for the short commings of the 1st. I think the reason we have not seen Doom is because, that was the fans biggest complaint with the 1st movie, the way they did Doom. I think they don't know how the fans will react, and they do not want any negative comments. Plain and simple. Everything appears positive, and going in the right direction, and they do not want to upset the apple cart right now.

 

[Tim Story+F4-2]

Horatiorome if u don't like F4-2 then why waste time writing such huge crap essays.

go to other boards man.

Every comic book has made big changes and x-men is the biggest of them yet u like x1 and x2. Bryan and fox both screwed that. X3 was the closest to comic book yet people hated it because it was shortest of all and cyclops dies. Big deal.

Spider-man is also overrated grabage. Hell they changed goblin look, gave spider-man organic webs. And in both movies the villain dies while in comic books those villains i think never died or stayed alive for quite a while. But GG and Doc ock were killed in sm1 and sm2 respectively. Hence, destroying chances of seeing more of them. Why do u then support that???

F4 was the truest adaption so far. They only screwed up Dr. DOOM in FF1 but atleast they didn't kill him. With F4-2 they are improving stuff like action, sfx and more leadership qualities from Reed, fantasticar. So far everything is good. We will see galactus but why do u want everything to be exactly like the jack kiby comics??? I mean the ultimate version are also comics and if they do that then why sweat. It aint their fault if galactus is shown that way because that is not their creation. They will say we did what the ultimate comics had simple.

x-men & spider-man had so many mistakes and changes and short cuts that arguing f4 should be true to comics is useless.

I mean did sandman kill peter parkers dad in comics??? That is so stupid on all levels. And that night surfer in SM3 is just bad looking.

I don't mind if f4-2 takes liberties. If u do then don't waste time talking about it and don't watch the movie. It is useless and takes too much space on these boards writing crap and spreading negativity.

 

[Nokio]

Horatiorome if u don't like F4-2 then why waste time writing such huge crap essays.

go to other boards man.

Every comic book has made big changes and x-men is the biggest of them yet u like x1 and x2. Bryan and fox both screwed that. X3 was the closest to comic book yet people hated it because it was shortest of all and cyclops dies. Big deal.

Spider-man is also overrated grabage. Hell they changed goblin look, gave spider-man organic webs. And in both movies the villain dies while in comic books those villains i think never died or stayed alive for quite a while. But GG and Doc ock were killed in sm1 and sm2 respectively. Hence, destroying chances of seeing more of them. Why do u then support that???

F4 was the truest adaption so far. They only screwed up Dr. DOOM in FF1 but atleast they didn't kill him. With F4-2 they are improving stuff like action, sfx and more leadership qualities from Reed, fantasticar. So far everything is good. We will see galactus but why do u want everything to be exactly like the jack kiby comics??? I mean the ultimate version are also comics and if they do that then why sweat. It aint their fault if galactus is shown that way because that is not their creation. They will say we did what the ultimate comics had simple.

x-men & spider-man had so many mistakes and changes and short cuts that arguing f4 should be true to comics is useless.

I mean did sandman kill peter parkers dad in comics??? That is so stupid on all levels. And that night surfer in SM3 is just bad looking.

I don't mind if f4-2 takes liberties. If u do then don't waste time talking about it and don't watch the movie. It is useless and takes too much space on these boards writing crap and spreading negativity.

Oh man give it a rest. Yeah changes have been made, but the creative teams actually did it to adapt the film better. The changes weren't out of character. Yeah both Doc Ock and GG died, but we all know death isn't final in the comic world. The GG died a similar way in the comics with the glider and he resurfaced. Doc Ock was shown being dragged down in the river, doesn't mean he's dead. As for Sandman, who knows what the final outcome of that will be, we'll see when the film comes. As for Sandy now being the killer of Uncle Ben, well we're going to have to see how it's played out.

Why don't you tell me the benifit of changing Galactus to the Ultimate version? How does it further the story? All I see is a way to be cost effective and less imaginative. As much as I hate to say it i could even accept the Ultiamte version if it was done right, but they won't even do that right. When FOX decided to put the SS in the sequel Galactus shouldn't even be an issue or a mystery or a questionable debate. This is what makes me worry, cuase it's late in the game. His design should've been complete in pre production. The fact that FOX and Tim story has to be dodgy raises my concern greatly.

Everything doesn't need to be like Jack Kirby. Some things can be updated and changed to help the story, but there is no reason what so ever to screw up galactus. What is the point of doing Ultimate Galactus, when the fans was displeased with the designing of Ga-lak-tus. No one was happy about that. That wasn't galactus and also the story arc was left open.
We don't know if those bee hive ships were nothing more then drones that he deployed, while a Galactus that is similar to 616 was in his world ship. Where was the watcher? The story ended but it wasn't closed.

The Ultimate story wasn't the greatest, wasn't well recieved by fans who purchased the book and isn't a classic story, so why would FOX think using this is sticking to the source material and pleasing the fans? We've seen enough of ships and been there done that in Star Wars and other sci fi films, we don't need some alien invasion looking scenerio posing as the real 616 Galactus. Altering galactus and them saying, "well it's the Ultimate version" is not going to fly with anyone. It's going to get pissed on by the fans. Which is probably why Galactus is not being shown and kept under wraps to keep down negativity of the film.

Fox pulled similar crap with x3, and look what happened, the film dropped hugly the folowing week. It wasn't worth mutiple viewings, which is what helps some summer blockbusters soar to over 3 and 4 hundred million.

 

[Advanced Dark]

Horatiorome if u don't like F4-2 then why waste time writing such huge crap essays.

go to other boards man.

Every comic book has made big changes and x-men is the biggest of them yet u like x1 and x2. Bryan and fox both screwed that. X3 was the closest to comic book yet people hated it because it was shortest of all and cyclops dies. Big deal.

Spider-man is also overrated grabage. Hell they changed goblin look, gave spider-man organic webs. And in both movies the villain dies while in comic books those villains i think never died or stayed alive for quite a while. But GG and Doc ock were killed in sm1 and sm2 respectively. Hence, destroying chances of seeing more of them. Why do u then support that???

F4 was the truest adaption so far. They only screwed up Dr. DOOM in FF1 but atleast they didn't kill him. With F4-2 they are improving stuff like action, sfx and more leadership qualities from Reed, fantasticar. So far everything is good. We will see galactus but why do u want everything to be exactly like the jack kiby comics??? I mean the ultimate version are also comics and if they do that then why sweat. It aint their fault if galactus is shown that way because that is not their creation. They will say we did what the ultimate comics had simple.

x-men & spider-man had so many mistakes and changes and short cuts that arguing f4 should be true to comics is useless.

I mean did sandman kill peter parkers dad in comics??? That is so stupid on all levels. And that night surfer in SM3 is just bad looking.

I don't mind if f4-2 takes liberties. If u do then don't waste time talking about it and don't watch the movie. It is useless and takes too much space on these boards writing crap and spreading negativity.

What I don't understand is how could someone not like something that he hasn't seen yet. He's putting alot of weight on nothing. Nothing being his little friend from the statue forums who touted seeing the film and Galactus was a purple fart. That's all been squashed by Tim Story himself. Oh well. I know when I log on to SHH I don't go seeking out topics I hate so I can post there to get a reaction. Why bother. I agree if you don't like something that you've seen that's one thing. But usually people go to a forum or thread to talk about something they like...except in review threads and even there why would anyone want to waste time talking day after day about a film they didn't like?

 

[HoratioRome]

LOL,...geez what'd I say?
you guys are so funny.
For some reason my comments just get under people's skin.
MUCH worse was said RIGHT HERE, and yet no one got this irrate over it.
you guys crack me up.
and the responses are so silly too.
as if there aren't people apologizing and excusing the "screw ups",..please.

anyway, I wasn't trying to start any trouble, I was just trying to make a point.

it is interesting that instead of actually going on record and answering my question I just get attacked,..

Hey tell you what, I'll go on the record.

If Doom is in fact "full Doom", if Reed acts like Reed, if Galactus makes an appearance and he shows up as Galactus (or he doesn't show up at all), if the story they came up with (which I know is different than the comics) is solid, is good, and makes sense I will heap all sorts of praises upon Story/Fox, and whoever else is involved in this film.

 

[Kelly]

LOL,...geez what'd I say?
you guys are so funny.
For some reason my comments just get under people's skin.
MUCH worse was said RIGHT HERE, and yet no one got this irrate over it.
you guys crack me up.
and the responses are so silly too.
as if there aren't people apologizing and excusing the "screw ups",..please.

anyway, I wasn't trying to start any trouble, I was just trying to make a point.

it is interesting that instead of actually going on record and answering my question I just get attacked,..

Hey tell you what, I'll go on the record.

If Doom is in fact "full Doom", if Reed acts like Reed, if Galactus makes an appearance and he shows up as Galactus (or he doesn't show up at all), if the story they came up with (which I know is different than the comics) is solid, is good, and makes sense I will heap all sorts of praises upon Story/Fox, and whoever else is involved in this film.

What????? Could you maybe quote someone.....????

 

[highguard]

true but there is one more element to consider.
but first let's acknowledge that you are correct.
there is no doubt that as far as hollywood is concerned the BO is the end all be all of the game. However, there have been a few movies that made TONS of money which are considered to have "failed"; even in Hollywood.
Both Matrix reloaded and revolution made twice as much as the first, but they are not considered to be on par with the first. The same can be said of Star wars episode 1,2, and perhaps 3.
now I'm sure that "hollywood" doesn't care cause they got their money, but it does affect their ability to generate more money through future sequels.
Remember, the last Batman movies actually made a lot of money but almost ruined the Superhero movie franchise.
so it does matter.
Now the thing to consider is this.
there are successes and there are successes. It is true that FF, Hulk, DD, X-men, and SMR all were "successful" in the sense that they generated enough money to make a profit. This allows for sequels to be made. However, I am of the opinion that these movies "failed" in spite of this because they missed out on the money they SHOULD have made.
If these movies were well accepted they easily could have made an additional 100 million dollars each. easily, so in many ways, not doing so is a failure.
Hollywood understands this for other movies, but they don't seem to get that for superhero movies. In spite of the evidence, I think they still consider comic movies to be such crap that they just don't quite believe in them yet. That's why they are always trying to change the source material to "make them better".
the proof is in the pudding. Spider-man which is the closest to the comics made more than TWICE as much as the next superhero movie.
I hope with 300 that they finally accept what Frank Miller said, that "it's pretty obvious that the more you stick to the source material the more successful the movies are".

it may be too late for FF2 though

I agree with everything you said here Horatio except the last part, I think FF2 will be fine as long as they give us Galactus. If they do that extra 100 million might materialize.

 

[Advanced Dark]

But Galactus isn't really neccessary as far as being a huge visible presence in this film. A glipse would be fine but just knowing he's there and what he's all about is enough for this film. If they further explore this storyline THEN it would be time to get into that but I want Doom wrapped up in this film if possible...at leats for now.

 

[Nokio]

But Galactus isn't really neccessary as far as being a huge visible presence in this film. A glipse would be fine but just knowing he's there and what he's all about is enough for this film. If they further explore this storyline THEN it would be time to get into that but I want Doom wrapped up in this film if possible...at leats for now.

I can agree with you to a certain extent about galactus, which is he doesn't need to be this huge presence in the film. He doesn't need to be seen walking around NY, (although it would be cool fx wise to have him hover over Ny and see peoples's reaction)while the f4 fight him. We all know that Galactus is massivly powerful, so what would be the point if the f4 is fighting something that can easily strip them of their powers? I've always felt it was silly to have the heroes of Earth fighting galactus face to face. This entity is beyond human power and understading, or so it's been said many times in the comics.

However galactus as he's been known in the marvel 616 universe needs to be in the film. Yes an alteration can be made, but it should go no further then his costume. His story is important to who the SS is. To me they are like Peanut butter & Jelly. They have to both be featured in an introduction. Yeah The SS is a good stand alone character and i hope Fox does him Justice and he gets the exposure he deserves so he can get his own film, but Galactus in the begining needs to be there and explained and seen. I'm fine with Galactus staying in his world ship, so long as he's shown and is very crediable. I'm fine with throwing in the matrix hive like ships from the Ultimate comics, so long as they are said to be devices of galactus and not galactus himself.

 

[GoblinScrier]

But Galactus isn't really neccessary as far as being a huge visible presence in this film. A glipse would be fine but just knowing he's there and what he's all about is enough for this film. If they further explore this storyline THEN it would be time to get into that but I want Doom wrapped up in this film if possible...at leats for now.

Well the part about wrapping Doom's story in this film may not happen...one interview has Julian saying he is contracted to either another F4 film or anothe film for Fox...hope, it is another F4 film...would love to see the final film be an all out invasion from Latveria where Doom's minions/robots fight the F4 while Doom himself makes his presence known in the United Nations to have them negotiate the terms of their surrender.

 

[HoratioRome]

What????? Could you maybe quote someone.....????

not you alba, .but comments like,..
" Horatiorome if u don't like F4-2 then why waste time writing such huge crap essays.

go to other boards man."

and
"Ok. Enough is enough. Who the hell is apoligizing for the screwups, and failures"

 

[HoratioRome]

I agree with everything you said here Horatio except the last part, I think FF2 will be fine as long as they give us Galactus. If they do that extra 100 million might materialize.

I hope you're right. It would go a LONG way with me to have Galactus in the movie. a LOOONNNNG way. I do agree that if they do have him and they handle it well,...Not campy, stupid or silly, that they would pull that extra 100 million

 

[HoratioRome]

I can agree with you to a certain extent about galactus, which is he doesn't need to be this huge presence in the film. He doesn't need to be seen walking around NY, (although it would be cool fx wise to have him hover over Ny and see peoples's reaction)while the f4 fight him. We all know that Galactus is massivly powerful, so what would be the point if the f4 is fighting something that can easily strip them of their powers? I've always felt it was silly to have the heroes of Earth fighting galactus face to face. This entity is beyond human power and understading, or so it's been said many times in the comics.

However galactus as he's been known in the marvel 616 universe needs to be in the film. Yes an alteration can be made, but it should go no further then his costume. His story is important to who the SS is. To me they are like Peanut butter & Jelly. They have to both be featured in an introduction. Yeah The SS is a good stand alone character and i hope Fox does him Justice and he gets the exposure he deserves so he can get his own film, but Galactus in the begining needs to be there and explained and seen. I'm fine with Galactus staying in his world ship, so long as he's shown and is very crediable. I'm fine with throwing in the matrix hive like ships from the Ultimate comics, so long as they are said to be devices of galactus and not galactus himself.

Wew,..you almost scared me with that statement. As far as Galactus not being needed, that should not be dignified with an answer.
The Silver Surfer story IS the Galactus story and vice versa. As you said, his story is crucial to the development of Silver surfer.
bottom line is which story are you telling?
The best most powerful story we have so far is the story of the coming of GALACTUS, not Silver Surfer.
SS, just happens to be a really really cool character in that story, but the story isn't about him.
SO obviously if you are making the coming of Galactus story it is silly not to have Galactus in it.

now if you are making a story about the coming of the Silver Surfer (as it appears this film is doing), than that's another story.
The only thing I would have to say about that is that there is NO WAY the coming of the SS story could be as powerful or as awesome as the coming of Galactus story. One easy reason is because the c/o/G story has the SS in it. so you wouldn't lose that.

 

[Kelly]

This thread just makes me tired...I've never seen so much bloviating in one place...I'm surprised theres anymore oxygen left in the world....lmao