Fant4stic: Reborn! - - - - Part 23

[spideyboy_1111]

Evil Dead 2, Mad Max: The Road Warrior. Both lighter than the original. Both better films.

Not superhero films. For some reason they're judged differently.

Either way its a big risk. Good luck with that wishful thinking

 

[jaymes_e06]

This debate reminds me of this short film on Youtube:

Yeah it looks cool but it doesn't make a lick of sense or even really pay homage to source material in a way that feels authentic. This is the same way I feel about this movie.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

But I'm saying, the Doctor Reboot changed the character(i.e. you can present something dark without being dark). Killed the Time Lords. Making him a brooding loner. Older fans complained that the Doctor wasn't a young, romantic lead character with the companion. Something that appealed to the NuWho fans.

If I want the 616 adapted, Marvel is 100% cause they are invested in keeping that version verbatim in stasis. But if I want to see a good adaptation of the Fantaststic Four property, I wouldn't ask Marvel cause they aren't invested in doing something outside the box with their characters. Why else are they adapting Civil War, Age of Ultron, TWS, or Infinity Wars? They want the stuff they already did to be regurgitated back out on cinemas.

They aren't interested in making not pre-tested ala the Dark Knight or Burton's Batman(I don't mean tone).

Here's the thing. Doctor who needed a rehaul to still include all the dated beloved villains and who-isms and still Be fun and taken seriously

But that being said it has nothing to do with what I was bringing doctor who up for. The fantastic four should duplicate the tone of the rebooted doctor who

 

[Sithborg]

Tim Burton's Batman had a lot of problems in both writing and Batman as a character.

But it was more or less given a pass because of the scope of the movie, the tone(first Batman movie since Adam West), and being one of a VERY few comic book movies of the time.

Or, or maybe it's given a "pass" because it is a good film?

Sci-fi doesnt have to be dark and gritty...star wars, doctor who and star trek all say hello

I was thinking more along the idea of sci-fi as "serious sci-fi", like I was thinking of "action/adventure" as fun, light stuff of the MCU. Genres can have a lot of variety. Why can't superhero films.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

This debate reminds me of this short film on Youtube:

Yeah it looks cool but it doesn't make a lick of sense or even really pay homage to source material in a way that feels authentic. This is the same way I feel about this movie.

It also imo shows how stereotypical some people can be... they'll love anything if its darker grittier and full of explosions

 

[Dasher10]

Not superhero films. For some reason they're judged differently.

Either way its a big risk. Good luck with that wishful thinking

Starting dark and then lightening the mood is a risk. That doesn't mean it can't be done. Remember when Quicksilver's costume was revealed, how everyone judged DOFP by the fact that his costume sucked? Remember how in the original Sam Raimi Spider-Man, we wound up with the helmeted Green Goblin and everyone hated it before it came out? Remember when a movie starring an alien tree was coming out? Those films all succeeded.

The real problem here is that unlike many of the other boards on here, the FF currently don't have a hardcore fan base anymore since they lost it after the Tim Story films. That's why everything is so negative. I've learned the hard way to not condemn something until I've seen it myself.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Or, or maybe it's given a "pass" because it is a good film?



I was thinking more along the idea of sci-fi as "serious sci-fi", like I was thinking of "action/adventure" as fun, light stuff of the MCU. Genres can have a lot of variety. Why can't superhero films.

They can, but the tone does not fit this property

 

[Dasher10]

It also imo shows how stereotypical some people can be... they'll love anything if its darker grittier and full of explosions

I seriously doubt that we'll be getting a hard-R Fantastic Four. This film will absolutely be PG-13.

The only comparison would be if Sue was secretly killing the other FF members while possessed by Malice, Johnny was a drug addict, Reed was shot to death and Ben was some sort of lone survivor. Then it would be like that take on Power Rangers. There is no way that Fox is going THAT dark. This isn't an exploitation film.

I think that this filmn will have elements of hard sci-fi but will still be within the action genre.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Starting dark and then lightening the mood is a risk. That doesn't mean it can't be done. Remember when Quicksilver's costume was revealed, how everyone judged DOFP by the fact that his costume sucked? Remember how in the original Sam Raimi Spider-Man, we wound up with the helmeted Green Goblin and everyone hated it before it came out? Remember when a movie starring an alien tree was coming out? Those films all succeeded.

The real problem here is that unlike many of the other boards on here, the FF currently don't have a hardcore fan base anymore since they lost it after the Tim Story films. That's why everything is so negative. I've learned the hard way to not condemn something until I've seen it myself.

Quicksilver's costume is still terrible, as is the green goblins. And because of that... they lessen the film.s. ruin? No, but lessen.

Dude the fantastic four quite obviously have a hardcore fan base for this many people to be pissed at this film. Is it as big as others? No.. but is it still a decent fanbase? Yes.. there's alot of people upset about this film..

Good for your train of thought. But i want the characters i know and love. And im not getting that. I dont care if this movie is great... its not the fantastic four. And not what i want

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I seriously doubt that we'll be getting a hard-R Fantastic Four. This film will absolutely be PG-13.

The only comparison would be if Sue was secretly killing the other FF members while possessed by Malice, Johnny was a drug addict, Reed was shot to death and Ben was some sort of lone survivor. Then it would be like that take on Power Rangers. There is no way that Fox is going THAT dark. This isn't an exploitation film.

I think that this filmn will have elements of hard sci-fi but will still be within the action genre.

Who said anything about R??? Of course it wouldnt get an R? What are you talking about?????

 

[Dasher10]

Quicksilver's costume is still terrible, as is the green goblins. And because of that... they lessen the film.s. ruin? No, but lessen.

Dude the fantastic four quite obviously have a hardcore fan base for this many people to be pissed at this film. Is it as big as others? No.. but is it still a decent fanbase? Yes.. there's alot of people upset about this film..

Good for your train of thought. But i want the characters i know and love. And im not getting that. I dont care if this movie is great... its not the fantastic four. And not what i want

Slightly lessen. Captain America's costume in The Avengers was also pretty bad. The film wasn't lessened all that much and we still got great film.

I'm still not calling the new FF costumes anything other than terrible. They lack the sense of uniformity that they need. Reed and Johnny's also look tacky and kind of bulky. I'd have added an insignia to Sue, put pants on Ben and then made Reed and Johnny's costumes look more like Sue's.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Here's the thing. Doctor who needed a rehaul to still include all the dated beloved villains and who-isms and still Be fun and taken seriously

But that being said it has nothing to do with what I was bringing doctor who up for. The fantastic four should duplicate the tone of the rebooted doctor who

But you don't know what tone is really until you see how it's presented. That's my point with Dr. Who. ( I agree Who is the right tone for FF though)

If I just told you he's coming back after committing genocide to his entire race and has been traveling alone brooding. That sounds dark, but the series isn't presented as dark.

A fantastic four movie with them wearing outfits to help with adapting to their powers isn't dark to me(or embarrassed about the source). It's just different. Until I see how they present the "disabilities" on screen. It's just words. If Reed's skin is constantly falling off or Torch is setting nurses on fire then it's dark.

If Torch is just put inside a "cold room" to keep his body temperature down until he gets his containment suit isn't dark, imo.

It's dragging out their origins which could be annoying. t:

 

[Dasher10]

Who said anything about R??? Of course it wouldnt get an R? What are you talking about?????

The Power Rangers fan film abomination. I didn't want to see an R-rated Power Rangers just as I don't want to see an R-rated Fantastic Four. I'm 99% positive that this won't be like the Power Rangers fan film.

 

[Dasher10]

But you don't know what tone is really until you see how it's presented. That's my point with Dr. Who. ( I agree Who is the right tone for FF though)

If I just told you he's coming back after committing genocide to his entire race and has been traveling alone brooding. That sounds dark, but the series isn't presented as dark.

A fantastic four movie with them wearing outfits to help with adapting to their powers isn't dark to me(or embarrassed about the source). It's just different. Until I see how they present the "disabilities" on screen. It's just words. If Reed's skin is constantly falling off or Torch is setting nurses on fire then it's dark.

If Torch is just put inside a "cold room" to keep his body temperature down until he gets his containment suit isn't dark, imo.

It's dragging out their origins which could be annoying. t:

This man gets it.

As long as the Cronenberg influence is just meant to be the FF finding their powers initially horrifying until they learn to control them instead of turning the movie into a gory splatter film with Reed spitting out his bones, Johnny's skin burning off and Ben being nearly paralyzed and suffering multiple organ failure, I don't see this being as dark as people are fearing.

Developing suits to help contain their powers isn't dark. The fact that Reed and Johnny are eventually able to expose their faces is proof that they eventually do adjust. Hopefully, come the sequel, we'll see matching uniforms.

 

[RAE072]

Evil Dead 2

There is no way Evil Dead 2 is better than Evil Dead.

It might have higher PRODUCTION value, which it does, but it's not a better/scarier movie.

Not that it's bad, just not as good as the first.

 

[RAE072]

But you don't know what tone is really until you see how it's presented.

Except we do because they've done nothing but tell us.

"Not campy," "grounded," "realistic."

All things said by cast and crew.

 

[moviedoors]

This debate reminds me of this short film on Youtube:

Yeah it looks cool but it doesn't make a lick of sense or even really pay homage to source material in a way that feels authentic. This is the same way I feel about this movie.

Well, that was straight up satire. I'm baffled that people took it at face value.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

But you don't know what tone is really until you see how it's presented. That's my point with Dr. Who. ( I agree Who is the right tone for FF though)

If I just told you he's coming back after committing genocide to his entire race and has been traveling alone brooding. That sounds dark, but the series isn't presented as dark.

A fantastic four movie with them wearing outfits to help with adapting to their powers isn't dark to me(or embarrassed about the source). It's just different. Until I see how they present the "disabilities" on screen. It's just words. If Reed's skin is constantly falling off or Torch is setting nurses on fire then it's dark.

If Torch is just put inside a "cold room" to keep his body temperature down until he gets his containment suit isn't dark, imo.

It's dragging out their origins which could be annoying. t:

The trailers are enough to show us the tone... its not like all we have is text or word of mouth about this film

 

[wobbly]

But you don't know what tone is really until you see how it's presented. That's my point with Dr. Who. ( I agree Who is the right tone for FF though)

If I just told you he's coming back after committing genocide to his entire race and has been traveling alone brooding. That sounds dark, but the series isn't presented as dark.

Nor was it the previews that preceded the shows return:
[YT]1hQyujVvRcY[/YT]
In fact the 1st episode didn't dwell too long on the Doctors recent past at all (the genocide thing was a surprise), and was a rather light fun affair (and thanks to some dodgy Fx all a bit silly).

Compare that to our first look at this film: Glum, moody voiceover, utterly humourless and all very serious. Where's the sense of fun?

A fantastic four movie with them wearing outfits to help with adapting to their powers isn't dark to me(or embarrassed about the source). It's just different. Until I see how they present the "disabilities" on screen. It's just words. If Reed's skin is constantly falling off or Torch is setting nurses on fire then it's dark.

If Torch is just put inside a "cold room" to keep his body temperature down until he gets his containment suit isn't dark, imo.

It's dragging out their origins which could be annoying. t:

I think the comments from Vaughan and Teller on Reed's powers are evidence that with him at least they are somewhat "embarrassed by the source".

Would agree though that dragging out the origin would be annoying.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

The Power Rangers fan film abomination. I didn't want to see an R-rated Power Rangers just as I don't want to see an R-rated Fantastic Four. I'm 99% positive that this won't be like the Power Rangers fan film.

Well im not talking ratings.. besides that, the power rangers short is only in the R genre because of language

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Except we do because they've done nothing but tell us.

"Not campy," "grounded," "realistic."

All things said by cast and crew.

That's playing it serious. No doubt.

But comedies have serious stuff, too.

500 Days of Summer is a rom-com about the end of a relationship. It's just about how it's presented. It's not Bridget Jones, but it's not some depressing drama either.


And for reference. This is pre and after reboot. That's not someone embarrassed of it's origins. It's just different.

 

[moviedoors]

There is no way Evil Dead 2 is better than Evil Dead.

It might have higher PRODUCTION value, which it does, but it's not a better/scarier movie.

Not that it's bad, just not as good as the first.

I think it's a better film, and not just because of general production values. It has a stronger authorial voice. It's far more confident and effective in its shifts between scares and laughs, and it's a tighter film in terms of pace. And I love the first film too. It has a grubby, lovable quality that is irresistible but the 2nd movie is Sam Raimi in total command of his abilities and voice as a filmmaker.

But that's beside the point. There is no right answer here, and trying to point to Evil Dead 2, pro or con, as an example of how good Fantastic Four will be is a fool's errand.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Nor was it the previews that preceded the shows return:
[YT]1hQyujVvRcY[/YT]
In fact the 1st episode didn't dwell too long on the Doctors recent past at all (the genocide thing was a surprise), and was a rather light fun affair (and thanks to some dodgy Fx all a bit silly).

Compare that to our first look at this film: Glum, moody voiceover, utterly humourless and all very serious. Where's the sense of fun?

Serious? I agree. That's not the same as dark and gritty though.

Matt Murdock is a humorous guy even in dark times. Just because the trailer has no humor doesn't mean they missed the mark.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

That playing it serious. No doubt.

But comedies have serious stuff, too.

500 Days of Summer is a rom-com about the end of a relationship. It's just about how it's presented. It's not Bridget Jones, but it's not some depressing drama either.


And for reference. This is pre and after reboot. That's not someone embarrassed of it's origins. It's just different.

I think you're not quite understanding... the amazing spider-man 2 had the death of a love interest but was still a relatively light film. You can have dark and serious things in a light film just as you can have a dark film with humor (the black comedy) that doesnt suddenly change a films over-all tone either. Doctor who has some dark stories, but its still a light hearted show

 

[spideyboy_1111]

i think it's a better film, and not just because of general production values. It has a stronger authorial voice. It's far more confident and effective in its shifts between scares and laughs, and it's a tighter film in terms of pace. And I love the first film too.

But that's beside the point. There is no right answer here, and trying to point to Evil Dead 2, pro or con, as an example of how good Fantastic Four will be is a fool's errand.

Im a little biased. I watched the 2 back to back. And just got annoyed because i felt like i was watching the same thing but on acid. But they're also two very different films... one horror, one comedy