Fant4stic: Reborn! - - Part 21

[the gael]

My guess is at 65 million before reshoots. But hey, the higher the budget the better so hopefully Fox won't make their money back.

I agree, the only way this movie may cost 100 million is with expensive reshoot. I like the way a one month reshoot is supposed to be a normal thing just to polish. Yes, they would be right... If the movie was a 6 month movie shot ! The movie was shoot in 2 month 1/2 maximum (they admitted it), and 1 month of reshoot is needed to "polish" a movie shot in 2 month ? Yes, of course, I buy it !

 

[Picard Stewart]

What ruins discussion is people like you who can't stop complaining about everyone else on the forum. I haven't broken any rules, and you are not the arbiter of them anyway.

You have an ignore button just like everyone else. I suggest you learn to use it if you find people expressing dislike of this film so intolerable.

No, no, no. What ruins discussion is you trolling this forum. I joined to voice my interest in the film after seeing the trailer and all I see is you holding the forum hostage with petty condescension. Why don't you stop wasting time on something you hate and focus your posting on stuff you like? And no I'm not using the ignore button. Trolling shouldn't go unopposed.

 

[Black Narcissus]

Don't bring Nolan into this. It ain't his fault that most studios don't have any new ideas and want to take a page out of his work, mane.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

And no I'm not using the ignore button.

It's your call.

Trolling shouldn't go unopposed.

Neither should bad movies, and I think I'll keep posting about this one as much as I feel is necessary, thanks.

Now you have a wonderful night sir.

 

[Dasher10]

I agree, the only way this movie may cost 100 million is with expensive reshoot. I like the way a one month reshoot is supposed to be a normal thing just to polish. Yes, they would be right... If the movie was a 6 month movie shot ! The movie was shoot in 2 month 1/2 maximum (they admitted it), and 1 month of reshoot is needed to "polish" a movie shot in 2 month ? Yes, of course, I buy it !

When somebody at Fox says to the press that the rough cut was, "a mess" it's pretty obvious that that was the case. That and the trailer not looking at all like a found footage film when earlier it was reported to feel like one. It's obvious that there were very extensive reshoots that Fox thought were necessary in order for anything from this film to see the light of day.

 

[Picard Stewart]

Don't bring Nolan into this. It ain't his fault that most studios don't have any new ideas and want to take a page out of his work, mane.

Its not about studios not having new ideas. Its studios feeling inspired by what he did with his Batman films. Batman Begins proposed the idea that you could do comic book movies seriously. The Dark Knight proved it.

I love that the FF are getting this treatment. I never thought they would and seeing them in a serious sci-fi venture is very exciting.

The Negative Zone, Mole Man, Doom, The Surfer, Skrulls, Galactus...we can now have in a serious manner.

Neither should bad movies, and I think I'll keep posting about this one as much as I feel is necessary, thanks.

Now you have a wonderful night sir.

You mean you'll keep trolling?

 

[justanotherguy]

Cracked.com just ripped this trailer to pieces.

Fanfourstic lol

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Jahns already did that joke.

 

[First Avenger]

Re-watching the trailer,don't know why but it reminds me a little of Ang Lee's Hulk.

 

[combocaz]

Looking at the trailer i hope they really delve into the characters psyche especially with ben grim coming to terms with being a freak.

 

[justanotherguy]

Jahns already did that joke.

Yeah it's not original, but they rip the trailer to pieces for what it is.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

This is tragic.

You're getting a serious FF movie after two moronic ones ten years ago with better actors, a better director and written by Days of Future Past's Simon Kinberg. You're getting Negative Zone exploration, real character development and above all an approach to the FF that feels passionate. I'm reading through your posts and you constantly single yourself out as a true FF fan. Why the commitment to negativity? How is that benefiting you? I refuse to believe you didn't like anything in that trailer. I love the FF and I loved the trailer. We're getting the Nolan treatment for the FF. That was a pipe dream a decade ago.

I see many FF fans in this forum that are sadly more committed to Disney than to the FF. Disney isn't doing FF movies. Its ridiculous to deny yourselves a great FF movie over nonsense like the studio making it. I wouldn't care if the BBC produced this movie or Annapurna or WWE Films. Who makes these movies shouldn't be a factor, only that the characters are being treated seriously.

Did you and I watch the same trailer? I don't give a s*** about Fox vs Disney. I just want a good FF film. I'm not 'committed to negativity'. Both of those accusations are ridiculous and offensive and illustrate you haven't read many of my posts. Show me something to illustrate this film has an intention to capture the elements that made me run to the comic book store as a kid and I'll become it's biggest fan. That trailer didn't' do it. I hope the next trailer will, but I also hope Kate Uptown will burst through my door and tell me she's been fantasizing about me

 

[Human Torch]

Re-watching the trailer,don't know why but it reminds me a little of Ang Lee's Hulk.

Not surprising. That film also was self important at the expense of it's characters as well.

 

[craigdbfan]

I loved Ang Lee's Hulk so if it's anything like that I'd be pretty juiced.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Why the commitment to negativity?

From January 20th 2013:

I remember the first time I saw Memento, I thought: "Wow! This director is really good."

And we've seen what Christopher Nolan has done since then. If you go back and look at some of the early films of directors who ended up being great, you can generally see a certain something.

Great directors can take simple stories and tell them in fresh and interesting ways, and I think we saw some clear evidence of that in Chronicle.

I feel reasonably confident that Trank is a good director, but that doesn't ensure he can do a film like FF - I felt exactly the same way when I heard Nolan when I heard he was doing Batman.

Trank's history is far too brief to make any firm judgemets at this point, but I feel about as good as I could about any director with a similarly limited track-record.

Feb 28 2013

I can't think of any other films released over the past couple years by first time directors that stand out in the way Chronicle did.

I'd stop short of calling it a great film, but the directing in particular showed talent and creativity. That's why so many people were interested in him and, while I can think of many experienced, proven directors that I might prefer, I'd have a very hard time thinking of sophomore director I would prefer.

March 20, 2013

Just to be a little more precise, here are the writing credits listed on IMDB:

Seth Grahame-Smith revisions
Jack Kirby characters
Stan Lee characters
Ashley Miller
Jeremy Slater screenplay
Jeremy Slater story
Zack Stentz
Josh Trank story

Stentz and Miller did Thor and X-Men First Class. Slater is mostly unknown and Grahame-Smith's biggest credits are a bit questionable in genre (Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter and Dark Shadows). And Trank had writing credit on Chronicle.

I don't know the details, but I'm a bit concerned by so many writing credits. It could be a bad sign that they need to keep re-working it.

At this point, I think we have to put faith in Trank to make the right decisions. Hopefully he'll have a good script to start with and just make it better from there. But if he receives a mediocre script, he may need to lift the story to where it needs to be.

I'm convinced that a talented director could have done great things with the first two scripts. The basic raw materials were there, but Tim Story ddn't tell the stories in a way that did them justice.

That was the kind of optimism and hope I used to have before we started seeing how off-track this production was.

 

[craigdbfan]

I can attest that Willie Lumpkin has probably been the most fair and level headed poster in this section. Period.

Everything he critiques, praises or questions is backed up by a detailed and clear headed explanation.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I can attest that Willie Lumpkin has probably been the most fair and level headed poster in this section. Period.

Everything he critiques, praises or questions is backed up by a detailed and clear headed explanation.

Thanks. But There have certainly been moments I've been on the verge of unhinged.

And I still have hope this film will feature the FF (and Doom), but I certainly can't see either in that trailer and we haven't heard any promises from those involved that we'll get what I'm hoping for.

 

[craigdbfan]

I have given this film nothing but scorn but after the trailer it kind of drew me in. It was just way better than I expected. I don't begrudge anyone for not liking what they saw, seeing as the iconography (for the exception of that last shot) is essentially non existent.

The trailer personally really worked for me. It's selling me on a good movie whether or not it will be a good F4 movie is what is spurring much of these heated debates. I'll admit that not having much invested in these characters probably goes a long way in helping appreciate what I saw in the trailer.

 

[Sony23]

Trailer Reaction from OneofUs.net:

"So, this is our first official look at this new Fantastic Four… and I’m not that impressed."

http://oneofus.net/2015/01/trailer-reaction-the-fantastic-four-2015/

 

[Spider-Fan]

Its not about studios not having new ideas. Its studios feeling inspired by what he did with his Batman films. Batman Begins proposed the idea that you could do comic book movies seriously. The Dark Knight proved it.

I love that the FF are getting this treatment. I never thought they would and seeing them in a serious sci-fi venture is very exciting.

The Negative Zone, Mole Man, Doom, The Surfer, Skrulls, Galactus...we can now have in a serious manner.



You mean you'll keep trolling?

Can you post without calling everyone a troll? Doesn't seem like it. Enjoy a month off.

 

[Brian Braddock]

A months reshoot for a movie that took only 2 months to shoot principally is not good. At its simplest, it equates to 50% of the movie not being good enough/in need of a radical overhaul.

 

[Mike Murdock]

Little Jamie doesn't quite exude "star linebacker". I'm not sure there's any method acting to fix that.

Baseball it is!

Yeah, I think Bell was miscast, but it would have been heaping absurdity on stupidity if they still made him a linebacker (I'm not criticizing his acting ability, I'm just not sure if he's the right fit). Unfortunately, Baseball doesn't really come off as street tough Jewish kid anymore. It's not the 1940s, so Basketball wouldn't work either. Football would have been the best fit anyway but he doesn't have the look for anything except for one of the skilled positions (QB, WR, CB) and I don't think that would have worked either.

 

[Dark Raven]

Yeah, I think Bell was miscast, but it would have been heaping absurdity on stupidity if they still made him a linebacker (I'm not criticizing his acting ability, I'm just not sure if he's the right fit). Unfortunately, Baseball doesn't really come off as street tough Jewish kid anymore. It's not the 1940s, so Basketball wouldn't work either. Football would have been the best fit anyway but he doesn't have the look for anything except for one of the skilled positions (QB, WR, CB) and I don't think that would have worked either.

Bell as a linebacker would be suicide. He'd be the puniest one on the team and would just be steamrolled over by the opposite side. I say ballet is the way to go for the modern Grimm. Bell has some skill in it and would look believable, and we've already seen there is some precedence in comics for Ben in a tutu. And if not ballet, then at least contemporary dance. Would that be so bad? At least it would lend credence to why the Yancy Street gang kept picking on him, if indeed there is even a gang in this version.

 

[wobbly]

A months reshoot for a movie that took only 2 months to shoot principally is not good. At its simplest, it equates to 50% of the movie not being good enough/in need of a radical overhaul.

Was it a month of reshoots? I doubt the 'few days' claim from Kinberg is true but a month would surprise me. If true the 'rough cut' must have been rough indeed.

 

[Orba]

Well Kinberg claimed that they just had 3-4 days of additional shooting, however we know that they also appear to be doing stuff in Romania and there are rumours that the shooting had been going on for a while before Kinberg made the comment.