Fant4stic: Reborn! - - - - Part 23

[CyclopsWasRight]

Wow, the forum won't let me link to the Last Action Hero Hamlet. Lame.

You have to post just the video code at the end of the YouTube link and not the full URL

People talk about Fox's 'artistic freedom' as if they've accomplished something without Bryan Singer and have earned the right to give us their vision instead of what we want to see. They haven't earned it.

Conveniently forgetting James Mangold and Matthew Vaughn I see.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I've always said, "dark and gritty" is a weak way of telling a film.. it's why Blade and X-men were dark and gritty.. because they didn't think the general audience would respond well to something more colorful and "comic booky" after the 2 batman films.

it was an ok way of thinking now.. because i highly doubt they could have pulled off The Avengers back then, and done it well. But this is 15 years later... where you can portray your character's far more faithfully than they ever were before. And people will buy it, if it's handled well, and if you let the heroes we know and love, be the heroes we know and love.

I have sooo many reservations about the DCCU because of these reasons.. i still feel like they are not embracing who these characters have always been.. and even if the movies are great... people will still clamor for a more traditional take. (look at X-men) we are finally likely getting the original 5 (with iceman traded for storm). It's also why even after the fantastic nolan batman films... i still want a batman that's a cross between nolan and burton, basically "Batman the Animated series" or better yet... in the vein of Arkham Asylum franchise... I want a dark and brooding world.. that isn't afraid to have joker with a mallet and wound up teeth... a poison ivy with man-eating plants... clay face.. croc.. etc... I want that batman on film

 

[moviedoors]

"Plenty of others" means squat when what you specifically want is a proper FF movie.

All I can say is, I'm sorry. I really wish I could let you share in my enthusiasm. It sucks for you guys that you don't like what you're seeing, and I mean that sincerely.

 

[marvelmadness13]

This has the core elements of UFF, whether you accept it or not.

How can people still be saying this is based off of the Ultimate F4?

UF4 doesn't have any of the following:

A blogger Doom named Domashev

A 12 year old Reed

A black Johnny

An adopted Sue

A malnourished tiny Ben Grimm

A black Franklin Storm

A Baxter Institute instead of a Baxter building

Bungee cord Reed

Heat vent Johnny

Sue Storm meets Oceans 11

A "grounded and gritty" feel.

The only thing that can even be considered close to the UF4 is a vague nod to the origin, making it dimensional travel rather than space travel. Nothing else in this travesty is borrowed from ANY version of the F4, Ultimate version included. This is a Trank Trash Original, nothing more or less. The Fantastic 4 lent nothing but their name.

 

[moviedoors]

I think everyone, pro and con, is reading far too much into just what it is we're gonna see come August. I have a positive attitude, but it's tenetive, and there's plenty of elements I'm not informed enough to comment on yet.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

How can people still be saying this is based off of the Ultimate F4?

UF4 doesn't have any of the following:

A 12 year old Reed

A malnourished tiny Ben Grimm.

I assume you mean the child in the trailer and are not being hyperbolic about Miles Tellers age like you are when calling Jamie Bell Malnourished and tiny

As for the rest SuperT said it best

The thing is with Johnny and Sue this all you need of them:
- Are they brother and sister? (check)
- Is their father Dr. Franklin Storm? (check)
- Is Sue a capable female scientist with force field and invisibility powers that's in love with Reed Richards? (check)
- Is Johnny the incredibly good looking, immature, impulsive, womanizer with pyrokinetic powers? (check)
- They both get their powers from an incredibly awful scientific accident? (check)
- Do they both come together with Reed and Ben to form the Fantastic 4, a group of mostly unrelated friends that turn into their own unique family? (check)
- They both battle Dr. Doom (check) .

I'll add:

Is Reed still a young scientific prodigy? (check)
Is Ben Grimm an Everyman character? (Check)
Does Reed get stretch powers(Check)
Does Ben get transformed into a Rock monster? (Check)
Do they all get their powers from the N-Zone? (Check)
Is Reed recruited by Dr Storm for the think-tank? (Check)
Is Reed the one to discover the N-Zone? (Check)

There are things different like the colour of the costumes, the history of the Storms siblingship, Dr Dooms profession and others but the core elements are all there and it's far from a movie with no resemblance

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Conveniently forgetting James Mangold and Matthew Vaughn I see.

Not conveniently forgetting at all. I literally fell asleep during The Wolverine and X-Men FC was okay, but it had painfully awkward moments and overall didn't do much for me.

Certainly neither film is anything like what a properly done Fantastic Four film could be.

 

[marvelmadness13]

So if they made a Superman movie about an obese Algerian man named Khalel who was adopted as a baby by the Kent's, a pot growing hippie couple in Oregon and renamed Mark Kent(alliterative names aren't realistic), taught to distrust and hate "the man", who flies with a jet pack, wears a black hoodie and jeans and has no super strength or heat vision you'd think that film had the core Superman story because he's still a foreigner raised by farmers and the names are the same?

That plot has the same amount of similarity to the source material as this one, which is a whopping .05 percent. What you're grasping at are straws on the level of "he has two arms and two legs, just like UF4!"

 

[moviedoors]

So if they made a Superman movie about an obese Algerian man named Khalel who was adopted as a baby by the Kent's, a pot growing hippie couple in Oregon and renamed Mark Kent(alliterative names aren't realistic), taught to distrust and hate "the man", who flies with a jet pack, wears a black hoodie and jeans and has no super strength or heat vision you'd think that film had the core Superman story because he's still a foreigner raised by farmers and the names are the same?

That plot has the same amount of similarity to the source material as this one, which is a whopping .05 percent. What you're grasping at are straws on the level of "he has two arms and two legs, just like UF4!"

I think you've exaggerated it far more than that.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I assume you mean the child in the trailer and are not being hyperbolic about Miles Tellers age like you are when calling Jamie Bell Malnourished and tiny

As for the rest SuperT said it best



I'll add:

Is Reed still a young scientific prodigy? (check) yes he is apparently
Is Ben Grimm an Everyman character? (Check) Do we know this one?
Does Reed get stretch powers(Check) extremely superficial
Does Ben get transformed into a Rock monster? (Check) he's buck naked... and still it's very superficial
Do they all get their powers from the N-Zone? (Check) the origin is the only major Ultimate influence.

There are things different like the colour of the costumes, the history of the Storms siblingship, Dr Dooms profession and others but the core elements are all there and it's far from a movie with no resemblance

there ya go

 

[Fincher]

I've always said, "dark and gritty" is a weak way of telling a film.. it's why Blade and X-men were dark and gritty.. because they didn't think the general audience would respond well to something more colorful and "comic booky" after the 2 batman films.

it was an ok way of thinking now.. because i highly doubt they could have pulled off The Avengers back then, and done it well. But this is 15 years later... where you can portray your character's far more faithfully than they ever were before. And people will buy it, if it's handled well, and if you let the heroes we know and love, be the heroes we know and love.

If The Avengers is your idea of what superhero movies should be, then certainly this reboot won't fit your ideal. That's not where I stand. I've enjoyed different kinds of superhero films, but my favorite ones tend to be of the darker variety, and what I'm particularly in the market for right now has nothing to do with the game-changing Avengers, but rather stuff like X-Men 1, Chronicle, or The Wolverine. Not something like The Dark Knight that strips out the science fiction and fantasy, but not a joke fest or a wall of action sequences, either. A movie that's focused, dark, and serious is right up my alley, so it's just a question of how well this movie serves that purpose.

 

[Tony Stark]

I think people are confusing details with tone. Sure there's 4 characters who gain powers (stretching, fire, invisibility, rock like body) by going into the negative zone, etc.

Those are plot details, the tone of this movie is ALL WRONG! This doesn't look like a movie based on any incarnation of the FF, it doesn't feel like any incarnation of the FF.

One of the complaints of Man of Steel was how brooding it was, with little humor. I'm not going to get into those arguments, but take that and multiply it a thousand fold, and that's what we have here. That's why this looks like a sequel to the Matrix more than it does a FF movie.

No one is saying this has to be a literal translation of the comics, but it should be reflective of the source material.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, the film makers were clearly embarrassed by the source material.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

If The Avengers is your idea of what superhero movies should be, then certainly this reboot won't fit your ideal. That's not where I stand. I've enjoyed different kinds superhero films, but my favorite ones tend to be of the darker variety, and what I'm particularly in the market for right now has nothing to do with the game-changing Avengers, but rather stuff like X-Men 1, Chronicle, or The Wolverine. Not something like The Dark Knight that strips out the science fiction and fantasy, but not a joke fest or a wall of action sequences, either. A movie that's focused, dark, and serious is right up my alley, so it's just a question of how well this movie serves that purpose.

I understand people like darker films, but the Fantastic Four does not fit this description! Fox has the X-Men (which yes can qualify) but since they want to build their own cinematic universe to rival Marvel's, they are squeezing the FF into that (wrong) mold. A big reason I love the Fantastic Four comics is because they were full of heart and wacky adventures and they always made me laugh. Instead Fox is giving me the most depressingly morose version of the team I've ever seen.

Fanfourstick: The Fantastic Four for the people who hate the Fantastic Four

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

I've said this before and I'll say it again, the film makers were clearly embarrassed by the source material.

You're not wrong. All Fox wants is to exploit the brand name and have that big Marvel banner to show up on the screen to get butts in seats. That's all this is.

 

[Tony Stark]

If The Avengers is your idea of what superhero movies should be, then certainly this reboot won't fit your ideal. That's not where I stand. I've enjoyed different kinds superhero films, but my favorite ones tend to be of the darker variety, and what I'm particularly in the market for right now has nothing to do with the game-changing Avengers, but rather stuff like X-Men 1, Chronicle, or The Wolverine. Not something like The Dark Knight that strips out the science fiction and fantasy, but not a joke fest or a wall of action sequences, either. A movie that's focused, dark, and serious is right up my alley, so it's just a question of how well this movie serves that purpose.

The problem is that's never what the FF were. Batman has been Dark since back in the Bob Kane days. Sure there's a version of Batman that's more light hearted camp, but that's not the Batman that resonates with people.

Wolverine is pretty dark as a character as well. He kills people, his catch phrase is, "I'm the best at what I do, and what I do isn't very nice."

The Fantastic Four have never been dark and gritty. Not in the 616, not in the UFF.

 

[Kelly]

The problem is that's never what the FF were. Batman has been Dark since back in the Bob Kane days. Sure there's a version of Batman that's more light hearted camp, but that's not the Batman that resonates with people.

Wolverine is pretty dark as a character as well. He kills people, his catch phrase is, "I'm the best at what I do, and what I do isn't very nice."

The Fantastic Four have never been dark and gritty. Not in the 616, not in the UFF.

Actually UFF, yeah they have....and even in the Marvel Knights you had a dark and gritty story in Marvel Knights F4 1,2,3,4 even in the artwork by Jae Lee....it was one of the, if not the darkest story that I have read. And the Civil Arc certainly hasn't been this....

I understand if people don't want a darker, gritty F4 movie, but to say that the F4 have never been dark and gritty in 616 or UFF is just not correct.

Overall, no they are nothing like Wolverine, but they have had a harder edge to them even in 616 for awhile.

 

[Sithborg]

The problem is that's never what the FF were. Batman has been Dark since back in the Bob Kane days. Sure there's a version of Batman that's more light hearted camp, but that's not the Batman that resonates with people.

Currently. Long lived franchises go through phases. Going in a more sci-fi direction than the typical action/adventure tentpole seems to be a reasonable offshoot of the FF. Of course, we still have to wait for the execution.

 

[RAE072]

Doctor Strange will presumably be a horror movie. Captain Marvel will be equal parts alien abduction film and war movie.

The FF are sci-fi.

That's not tone. That's genre.

Yes, the FF are sci-fi. That's genre.

What they shouldn't be is dark and gritty. That's tone.

"But u want campy movie?!?1"

No. Opposite of dark and gritty is not campy/cheesy. They can be light in tone and still take itself seriously as a film with a story to tell.

FF shouldn't look like an early 2000s comic book movie, like this does. It should look like The Incredibles mixed with Avengers and GotG. IN TONE.

A lotta things being mischaracterized in favor of defending this movie.

 

[TeeKay]

I've said this before and I'll say it again, the film makers were clearly embarrassed by the source material.

Well then they're not worthy of producing these films.

 

[Dasher10]

I don't feel like dark equals dated. The Sam Raimi Spider-Man films were plenty light in tone.

Again, I feel like this will be like Burton's Batman which wasn't true to the character but was still plenty iconic. We may not be getting the FF that we want but at the very least Doom's voice sounds better which counts for something.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Please. Burton's Batman was aesthetically brilliant. This is not.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

If The Avengers is your idea of what superhero movies should be, then certainly this reboot won't fit your ideal. That's not where I stand. I've enjoyed different kinds of superhero films, but my favorite ones tend to be of the darker variety, and what I'm particularly in the market for right now has nothing to do with the game-changing Avengers, but rather stuff like X-Men 1, Chronicle, or The Wolverine. Not something like The Dark Knight that strips out the science fiction and fantasy, but not a joke fest or a wall of action sequences, either. A movie that's focused, dark, and serious is right up my alley, so it's just a question of how well this movie serves that purpose.

Ok here's the thing you arn't getting... i have no problem with dark and gritty for characters who have a tone that fits... but the avengers, the justice league, the fantastic four... should not be "dark and gritty" the least of which should be the fantastic four who are not known for that tone.

so yes, of course i despise this film

 

[Dasher10]

Please. Burton's Batman was aesthetically brilliant. This is not.

I meant in terms of Batman killing people in cold blood with explosives. That wasn't Batman to me.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I think people are confusing details with tone. Sure there's 4 characters who gain powers (stretching, fire, invisibility, rock like body) by going into the negative zone, etc.

Those are plot details, the tone of this movie is ALL WRONG! This doesn't look like a movie based on any incarnation of the FF, it doesn't feel like any incarnation of the FF.

One of the complaints of Man of Steel was how brooding it was, with little humor. I'm not going to get into those arguments, but take that and multiply it a thousand fold, and that's what we have here. That's why this looks like a sequel to the Matrix more than it does a FF movie.

No one is saying this has to be a literal translation of the comics, but it should be reflective of the source material.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, the film makers were clearly embarrassed by the source material.

Well said

 

[def28]

I meant in terms of Batman killing people in cold blood with explosives. That wasn't Batman to me.

Batman has killed quite a few people through his comic career.

Depends what era and writer you are reading.