Fant4stic: Reborn! - - - - Part 23

[Tacit Ronin]

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/

While this is a truthful article, it sort of does put the superhero genre as an extremely limited one.

And while a superhero movie can never be realistic or be hard sci-fi, I've found that superheroes can often be great vehicles for social and political commentary. That;s true for both the comics and a few of the movies.

 

[Dasher10]

I don't think that this film is going to be 100% realistic. I think it's just going to not be as cartoonish as the Tim Story films.

The Cracked article set up a false dichotomy. Either it's like the Story films or it's perfectly realistic and also, "depressing." I don't think this is going to explore the consequences of real world science. I think it's just that the UFF origin is easier for audiences to swallow than the 616 origin and we already saw the 616 origin. The last time a superhero reboot redid the same origin story, it was poorly received with the first TASM which was too much of a retread.

And Gravity got the science wrong a number of times but I didn't care since it was visually striking. I'm not going to cal that a, "bad movie" just because it wasn't totally realistic and according to Cracked, "bad sci-fi."

Also, why is Kinberg calling the shots instead of Trank a bad thing? Kinberg has more experience despite a hit or miss track record and he's involved with Chappie and The Martian and the former has already gotten some positive buzz prior to release.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

While this is a truthful article, it sort of does put the superhero genre as an extremely limited one.

And while a superhero movie can never be realistic or be hard sci-fi, I've found that superheroes can often be great vehicles for social and political commentary. That;s true for both the comics and a few of the movies.

Well in fairness, I think superheroes and comic books can include a very wide variety of themes and elements. When this article refers to 'Superhero', I think they're talking about a specific type - Superman, Spider-man, Captain America, FF etc. I think even Hulk might be classified a little differently than those archetypes, but I think FF falls cleanly into the specific class the author is discussing.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Also, why is Kinberg calling the shots instead of Trank a bad thing? Kinberg has more experience despite a hit or miss track record and he's involved with Chappie and The Martian and the former has already gotten some positive buzz prior to release.

Has Kinberg ever directed a film?

 

[Tacit Ronin]

And Gravity got the science wrong a number of times but I didn't care since it was visually striking. I'm not going to cal that a, "bad movie" just because it wasn't totally realistic and according to Cracked, "bad sci-fi."

Gravity isn't a sc-fi film. It's a survival film, in Space.

 

[Dasher10]

Well in fairness, I think superheroes and comic books can include a very wide variety of themes and elements. When this article refers to 'Superhero', I think they're talking about a specific type - Superman, Spider-man, Captain America, FF etc. I think even Hulk might be classified a little differently than those archetypes, but I think FF falls cleanly into the specific class the author is discussing.

They're acting like Man of Steel and The Dark Knight were failures. They weren't. The Dark Knight won an Oscar and has an 82 Metacritic score. Man of Steel grossed over $650M and then outgrossed DOFP and CA:TWS in terms of home video sales.

Saying that all CBMs need to be like GOTG just because that's popular right now and Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy is not dated, obsolete and in retrospect not all and great is like saying that Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy made Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films dated and retroactively bad.

There's room for shifts in tone and genre. It's the difference between 2001 and Wal-E.

Cracked is't an objective news site. They're also known for getting some things wrong and stretching facts to prove their own point. It's a humor site, so don't take it too seriously.

 

[wobbly]

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.

Use Firefox and the "ablock plus" add-on. Works a charm for stopping that all stuff for me.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Wall E is a semi-hard sc-fi picture. It does present a possible future where robots do all our bidding. Even if the way it's presented is humorous.

 

[Dasher10]

Wall E is a semi-hard sc-fi picture. It does present a possible future where robots do all our bidding. Even if the way it's presented is humorous.

It's still different from 2001. 2001 features robots going haywire, asks existential questions and involves aliens. Wall-E is a comedy with funny robots.

Both are sci-fi. Both are also wildly different. There is no way that you can say that Wall-E was a poor sci-fi film because it was funny when Cracked is arguing that there's a certain way to do CBMs and sci-fi and they can never intersect, therefore, this film will fail.

That and Cracked piling hate on the Dark Knight trilogy just to prove a point is incredibly petty.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Use Firefox and the "ablock plus" add-on. Works a charm for stopping that all stuff for me.

Not ads, I meant different articles they always post at the top and bottom of the page. Once I see the title I'm like "well, I guess one more won't hurt..." *click* I've found Cracked is much like tvtropes or wikipedia in that regard.

 

[Zarex]

They're acting like Man of Steel and The Dark Knight were failures. They weren't. The Dark Knight won an Oscar and has an 82 Metacritic score. Man of Steel grossed over $650M and then outgrossed DOFP and CA:TWS in terms of home video sales.

The article doesn't level any criticism at The Dark Knight. It simply points out that "realistic" films like TDK and TWS are not particularly realistic.

Saying that all CBMs need to be like GOTG just because that's popular right now and Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy is not dated, obsolete and in retrospect not all and great is like saying that Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy made Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films dated and retroactively bad.
.

Again, not the point of the article. GOTG is the perfect example of what an FF film could be in the proper hands, but the author is not advocating for a whacky action comedy version of Daredevil or Suicide Squad.

 

[Dasher10]

The article doesn't level any criticism at The Dark Knight. It simply points out that "realistic" films like TDK and TWS are not particularly realistic.



Again, not the point of the article. GOTG is the perfect example of what an FF film could be in the proper hands, but the author is not advocating for a whacky action comedy version of Daredevil or Suicide Squad.

This film isn't going to be particularly realistic. We have parallel universes and a man made of rocks. That and Doom looks like he's going to be Ultimate Doom who's made out of organic metal. I wouldn't call that, "realistic."

And Man of Steel had Zod punching Superman through buildings. Also not in any way something which you would see in the real world.

GOTG was already made. Fox shouldn't rip-off of it and make a carbon copy. FF should feel like its own thing.

 

[wobbly]

Not ads, I meant different articles they always post at the top and bottom of the page. Once I see the title I'm like "well, I guess one more won't hurt..." *click* I've found Cracked is much like tvtropes or wikipedia in that regard.

Ah. Gotcha. I've got caught in the 'article loop' myself before now. Hours later wonder where the hell the time went, lol

 

[spideyboy_1111]

This film isn't going to be particularly realistic. We have parallel universes and a NAKED man made of rocks. That and Doom looks like he's going to be Ultimate Doom who's made out of organic metal. I wouldn't call that, "realistic."

And Man of Steel had Zod punching Superman through buildings. Also not in any way something which you would see in the real world.

GOTG was already made. Fox shouldn't rip-off of it and make a carbon copy. FF should feel like its own thing.

Fixed.


also.. i don't think you understand the term "realistic" in this context...

There's been 2 ways of comic films.. you've got "Taking the Audience to a superhero world that feels believable" (the entire MCU falls under this, it's complete sci-fi and fantasy.. that doesn't need as much real world feel to it, they arn't afraid to be "comic booky") and "taking the superheroes and bringing them to our world and making them more believable" (the nolan batman films, man of steel, and X-men 1, X2, and The Wolverine fall into this category, they have non-realistic elements.. but it feels more "our world" than "there world" it's dark, its gritty, it's restricted and subdued. and in all but MOS case, the powers are restricted and limited. No SuperHumans in the nolan films, no comic-booky elements (aside from maybe 2-faces design), all grounded and more "realistic", with X-men.. many of there abilities were restricted.. iceman no icing up, barely any flying... really only using abilities to solve problems, not for fun or leisure, etc... with superman, it really just had the dark and gritty aspect, and it felt more "real" than comic-booky

I think "Dark and Gritty" is a great tone for characters that match that.. I think all Vigilante heroes.. that works for. But when you get into team heroes.. and major fantastical elements.. it does not. And i feel it restricts and hinders their potential. It doesn't work for the Avengers, X-men (which is why they've started embracing more fantastical elements with DOFP and First Class), Justice League, and The Fantastic Four... I can only think of 2 characters where "comic booky" and "Dark and gritty realism" can merge together, or swing either way... and that's Spider-Man and Batman. They've got sooo many dark and gritty stories, but also very comic-booky and fantastical stories as well...

The Fantastic Four (even though they may have dipped into it a few times) are not known for this theme. plain and simple. So that's why it's creating friction amongst the fan-base.

 

[Zarex]

This film isn't going to be particularly realistic. We have parallel universes and a man made of rocks. That and Doom looks like he's going to be Ultimate Doom who's made out of organic metal. I wouldn't call that, "realistic."

And Man of Steel had Zod punching Superman through buildings. Also not in any way something which you would see in the real world.

GOTG was already made. Fox shouldn't rip-off of it and make a carbon copy. FF should feel like its own thing.

The words the director, producer and actors are using - grounded, gritty, hard sci-fi, "not comicbooky" - certainly suggest they are trying to make a real world version of what is in and of itself a ridiculous concept. That's the point the author is making, that hard sci-fi and the FF are like oil and water.

Future directors shouldn't rip off Guardians, but the tone of that film is exactly what FOX should have been shooting for. I'm certain everyone at FOX is now kicking themselves that they didn't.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

I was thinking. I hope when the release date nears we get four spot-light trailers or featurettes on each character

 

[TeeKay]

Lmao guys check out this HISHE's latest video on reboots especially at the end.
[Yt]CJUmSwbZANw[/MEDIA]

 

[coolmovies]

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.

No no no. Josh handled reshoots whereas someone else was ghost directing it between may-august. You know who. I was told that Josh was really pissed with such a hands on approach that he at some point felt why the hell was he even doing this, if someone else is running the show.

He took whatever was shot and started editing with his bud, and working on vfx using otoy. He was so angry that he locked himself up in editing room trying to fix whatever was shot and stopped taking calls from fox. Finally, when he did, he showed fox the rough cut and they thought there was good stuff in there but still messy in terms of flow of the movie and the vfx wasn't up to desired level.

That's when fox brought in weta and mpc. And josh asked for reshoots with no interference from the person. He has done the reshoots and putting together a new cut. Apparently he is almost done.

 

[terry78]

Why they didn't just use WETA/MPC at the start I don't know. I assume he felt he could revolutionize that new tool.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Is this dude supposed to be an insider or something?

 

[Flint Marko]

No no no. Josh handled reshoots whereas someone else was ghost directing it between may-august. You know who. I was told that Josh was really pissed with such a hands on approach that he at some point felt why the hell was he even doing this, if someone else is running the show.

He took whatever was shot and started editing with his bud, and working on vfx using otoy. He was so angry that he locked himself up in editing room trying to fix whatever was shot and stopped taking calls from fox. Finally, when he did, he showed fox the rough cut and they thought there was good stuff in there but still messy in terms of flow of the movie and the vfx wasn't up to desired level.

That's when fox brought in weta and mpc. And josh asked for reshoots with no interference from the person. He has done the reshoots and putting together a new cut. Apparently he is almost done.

I'm assuming Kinberg is the person in question?
This is a very different interpretation of all the rumors, where is this information coming from? If true, it definitely casts Trank in a different light and means this film has more hope than I would have guessed.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

this seems bogus... no single person does cgi fx for a film.. it takes a whole team and pain staking ours to do CGI special FX.....

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

Is this dude supposed to be an insider or something?

Maybe it's Michael B. Jordan or Teller?

 

[terry78]

It's Miley Cyrus' brother.

 

[coolmovies]

I'm assuming Kinberg is the person in question?
This is a very different interpretation of all the rumors, where is this information coming from? If true, it definitely casts Trank in a different light and means this film has more hope than I would have guessed.

Yes. Apparently, Josh absolutely detests anyone telling him what to do and how on the set. He is under contractual obligation so can't be fully honest else fox will make sure he never gets any work in Hollywood. Basically, he is going to take the hit with this movie. And if turns out all fine then simon will share a lot of the credit.