Fant4stic: Reborn! - - - - Part 23

[TheComicbookKid]

And damn, if that's not right out of the comics....

yeah, I know, but the world's not ending. What is Doom supposed to conquer? Doom's entire presence in the movie was unnecessary.

It was just an excuse for a chase sequence to prolong stopping Galactus.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

yeah, I know, but the world's not ending. What is Doom supposed to conquer? Doom's entire presence in the movie was unnecessary.

It was just an excuse for a chase sequence to prolong stopping Galactus.

Yep. Galactus was a big enough story without cramming that in there. . . or they could have had Doom steal Surfer's power and saved Galactus for the next film.

Forcing two huge stories into the film just ensured neither of them worked.

 

[Farren]

The irony is that as awful as Doom was in the first movie when he was out of character...he was even worse in the second one when he started looking and acting like the Doom we know (at least on the surface). His story was pointless filler, he seemed to have no real motive, and there was no logical progression in character development from the first movie.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

So long as Fox possesses this franchise, you won't be seeing accurate 616 portrayals of any of the key players....

Since this is likely their last go at the franchise and they aren't adapting that version this time we obviously won't be seeing that, would be foolish to expect otherwise

Am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with the direction of the film?

1. The tone and genre is similar to Hickman's.

2. The film is character driven like Mark Waid's run.

3. Sue is based on John Byrne's version.

4. The comic is based on the origin of the UFF since the 616 origin is a bit dated.

5. The premise of the FF having traumatic transformations and being explorers of the unknown is taken straight from Stan Lee.

It's like a checklist of elements of the most popular FF runs that resonated with fans. The Tim Story films took the bright colors from the comic and based the films tonally off of Walt Simonson's run which was successful for poking fun at comics and superheros and ramming home how silly and ridiculous the Marvel U in general is when taken at face value.

The main problem with that is that the Simonson FF only work when you have everything else being dark and gritty which is hard when you have films like Kingsman and Guardians representing CBMs. It took place from 1989-1991 when being as grim as possible was en vogue. Walt Simonson was trying to parody the trends of the time. I'd much rather have the FF portrayed seriously (as long as the film is done well) than something that's just like the Tim Story movies but with a better script.

Excellent post

 

[RAE072]

A humanoid version could certainly be done, but would require some significant adaptation to work.

Man, Guardians of the Galaxy did it REALLY well.

That's talent and creativity for you though.

and we'll get the 616 version if the film supports sequels.

I can't wait to hear why you think this.

Plus, I can't hate a movie until I see it.

No one's hating a movie. They're hating what they're hearing about the movie.

The irony is that as awful as Doom was in the first movie when he was out of character...he was even worse in the second one when he started looking and acting like the Doom we know (at least on the surface). His story was pointless filler, he seemed to have no real motive, and there was no logical progression in character development from the first movie.

Which, let's be clear, isn't the fault of Doom as a character. It's the fault of awful writing and directing in a bad movie.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Man, Guardians of the Galaxy did it REALLY well.

That's talent and creativity for you though.

Win.

 

[RAE072]

Win.

As much as that scene excited me and made me go "holy ****!" when I saw it, it also made me sad that the FF(and Doom, Galactus, etc) aren't at a studio that'll adapt/translate them with care and respect.

2 strikes at their current home, with one more looking likely.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

And damn, if that's not right out of the comics....

honestly.. if i had to choose between the 2 Story films... ROTSS is probably my favorite, ignoring alba's makeup and reed dancing aside. it all felt more like the comics than the first.. and i did like that aspect.

 

[Urich Leeds]

Am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with the direction of the film?

1. The tone and genre is similar to Hickman's.

2. The film is character driven like Mark Waid's run.

3. Sue is based on John Byrne's version.

4. The comic is based on the origin of the UFF since the 616 origin is a bit dated.

5. The premise of the FF having traumatic transformations and being explorers of the unknown is taken straight from Stan Lee.

It's like a checklist of elements of the most popular FF runs that resonated with fans. The Tim Story films took the bright colors from the comic and based the films tonally off of Walt Simonson's run which was successful for poking fun at comics and superheros and ramming home how silly and ridiculous the Marvel U in general is when taken at face value.

The main problem with that is that the Simonson FF only work when you have everything else being dark and gritty which is hard when you have films like Kingsman and Guardians representing CBMs. It took place from 1989-1991 when being as grim as possible was en vogue. Walt Simonson was trying to parody the trends of the time. I'd much rather have the FF portrayed seriously (as long as the film is done well) than something that's just like the Tim Story movies but with a better script.

You give Trank, Kinberg, and this film, FAAAAR too much credit.

 

[Zarex]

Here's another wonderful takedown of FFINO from our good friends at CRACKED.

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/5-ways-hollywood-uses-science-to-ruin-superhero-movies/

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Here's another wonderful takedown of FFINO from our good friends at CRACKED.

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/5-ways-hollywood-uses-science-to-ruin-superhero-movies/

Myth - Fantastic Four has always been science fiction.

Not true. FF is fantasy with elements of science fiction.

And there's a big difference. 2001 A Space Odyssey was science fiction. Star Wars was Fantasy with elements of science fiction and those are two COMPLETELY different types of films.

If these film-makers don't recognize that important distinction (and it seems they don't) this film is likely to miss the target by a wide margin.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Here's another wonderful takedown of FFINO from our good friends at CRACKED.

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/5-ways-hollywood-uses-science-to-ruin-superhero-movies/

We see The Thing and feel bad for him because he's a regular guy that got turned into a hideous rock monster, but we're not sitting there thinking "Man, if science doesn't start taking some responsibility for its reckless radiation experiments, that could happen to any one of us."

LOL! That is awesome.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Myth - Fantastic Four has always been science fiction.

Not true. FF is fantasy with elements of science fiction.

And there's a big difference. 2001 A Space Odyssey was science fiction. Star Wars was Fantasy with elements of science fiction and those are two COMPLETELY different types of films.

If these film-makers don't recognize that important distinction (and it seems they don't) this film is likely to miss the target by a wide margin.

This cuts right to the heart of it but of course others on here will disagree and come up with convoluted arguments as to why they are right.

 

[coolmovies]

So.....wanna know something?! It wouldn't come as a shock though...let's just say I feel kinda bad for Josh. Should have left this project, and let someone else do it. But then again no one was willing to step in.

There is more....should I tell?

 

[First Avenger]

Tell us man!

 

[wobbly]

So.....wanna know something?! It wouldn't come as a shock though...let's just say I feel kinda bad for Josh. Should have left this project, and let someone else do it. But then again no one was willing to step in.

There is more....should I tell?

Well, there isn't much else for us to talk about atm, so go ahead

 

[terry78]

Honestly the few times I've seen this trailer at a theatre it actually got a semi positive reaction. People chattering amongst themselves about it.

 

[coolmovies]

Tell us man!

Josh was director in name only on this movie when it was shooting from May-August. You can figure out who actually was directing.

He was in charge of the reshoots though.

 

[Zarex]

Myth - Fantastic Four has always been science fiction.

Not true. FF is fantasy with elements of science fiction.

And there's a big difference. 2001 A Space Odyssey was science fiction. Star Wars was Fantasy with elements of science fiction and those are two COMPLETELY different types of films.

If these film-makers don't recognize that important distinction (and it seems they don't) this film is likely to miss the target by a wide margin.

The closing lines about how a scientifically realistic FF doesn't work are just perfect:

So while some people might find that idea fascinating, the majority of fans who grew up loving The Thing and Johnny Storm did so because those characters were larger than life. It's escapist fantasy. On the scale between sci-fi and fantasy, Fantastic Four is right next to Willow and the Smurfs. Nobody wants to see scientifically accurate Smurfs.

 

[First Avenger]

Kinberg?

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Josh was director in name only on this movie when it was shooting from May-August. You can figure out who actually was directing.

He was in charge of the reshoots though.

Interesting. From the rumors it seemed like something was going on, but I would have assumed the opposite - he directed the principle photography but was removed after that.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

The closing lines about how a scientifically realistic FF doesn't work are just perfect:

So while some people might find that idea fascinating, the majority of fans who grew up loving The Thing and Johnny Storm did so because those characters were larger than life. It's escapist fantasy. On the scale between sci-fi and fantasy, Fantastic Four is right next to Willow and the Smurfs. Nobody wants to see scientifically accurate Smurfs.

It was a very good article and summed up many of my feelings.

Generally speaking there are two methods to explain the crazy things we see fantasy stories - magic and pseudo science - and they can be used basically interchangeably.

Comic books aren't trying to predict or warn as science fiction does. They just want to tell a fun story and use a bit of techno-babble to get things going.

As I mentioned in a post a few days ago, the worst thing these comic-books or films can do is to spend too much trying to explain things.

It's 'unstable molecules', that's how, now let's just move on.

 

[wobbly]

Josh was director in name only on this movie when it was shooting from May-August. You can figure out who actually was directing.

He was in charge of the reshoots though.

Hmmn...The Bleeding Cool thing on Fox fishing for Directors might have been in the ballpark after all.

Grain of salt at the ready as ever though.

 

[wobbly]

Interesting. From the rumors it seemed like something was going on, but I would have assumed the opposite - he directed the principle photography but was removed after that.

That's what it looked like to me too: Trank did all the original stuff, Fox didn't like it, and the reshoots to fix it were being handled (or overseen big time at any rate) by someone else?

Will be interesting to see just who did what down the line.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Great article. Now I've finished it but have nine more tabs opened. The last time this happened I was opening new links for literally weeks. Thanks Cracked. Thanks Zarex.