Fant4stic Fant4stic: Reborn! - - - - - - - - Part 27

[Zarex]

This film doesn't feel like FF to me in anything but the most superficial ways and that's my problem. I don't need it to be 100% , but I'd like it to be higher than 25%.

Completely agree. Some people may whine and complain about minor adjustments in other films, but FFINO is a completely different category than anything we've seen during the golden age of comic book adaptations. In my opinion, its an enormous step backward.

If this film were released back in the 70s or 80s we would have *****ed and moaned and then saw it a second time after it ended up in the Dollar Cinema. But with respectful big budget adaptations on the big screen and the flood of projects available on TV and streaming we have the luxury of ignoring Trank's "contemporary re-imagining".

 

[jaymes_e06]

And Raimi's Spiderman was right yet we still haven't gotten it right otherwise Garfield's would have been cheered. Yet we are still arguing about Ditko eyes and the round spider.

Now you're comparing apples to oranges because there are nitpicks and there are complete character overhauls that make them not even look like super heroes.

 

[marvelmadness13]

Now you're comparing apples to oranges because there are nitpicks and there are complete character overhauls that make them not even look like super heroes.

They aren't superheroes, they're "kids with disabilities."

 

[moviedoors]

Personally....I see no big deal (as in calling people liars) about someone a while back saying there will be 3 or 4 days of reshoots and now we find out there are more than that. Many times you can say that something will take X amount of time to do before you start it....and once you start doing it, it extends for one reason or another. If they started correcting something....and then saw how nice the new stuff turned out...someone high up can make the decision to do more corrections. It's very possible someone at FOX has took all the complaints from fans to heart and made a decision to try and fix some of the things they are worried about.

I tend towards this POV. I'm not comfortable with all these charges of "liar!"

 

[Orba]

I think part of it was that at the time Kinberg was saying that they were just doing a couple of days of reshoots there was rumours that they had already been reshooting for weeks. So it wasn't it wasn't a case of plans changing after he had said it but that he knew it was a lie when he said it.

 

[moviedoors]

I think part of it was that at the time Kinberg was saying that they were just doing a couple of days of reshoots there was rumours that they had already been reshooting for weeks. So it wasn't it wasn't a case of plans changing after he had said it but that he knew it was a lie when he said it.

And were these rumors confirmed? There are a lot of rumors around these parts that are just accepted as gospel, and I'm just not convinced.

 

[wobbly]

And we're these rumors confirmed? There are a lot of rumors around these parts that are just accepted as gospel, and I'm just not convinced.

There were sporadic twitter posts from extras and so on that they had been doing filming the day of their posts or just completed it coming in before and well after Kinberg's "a few days" thing. These are people with no reason to lie about it: They were not saying anything negative, nor breaking any NDA's by revealing anything.

If that's not enough confirmation Nelson stating just recently he was due to do more filming on it should be.

It's not a big deal that Kinberg fibbed about it. The official Fox line would never be to admit they were doing anything more than 'business as usual' pick-ups, rather than a more extensive 'salvage' job. I'd be far more surprised if they did come and say "yeah, well, we hated the rough cut so we had them reshoot a load of it!".

Anyways, I have no doubt that there was more reshoots than Kinberg let on. Just how much is anyone's guess, and be it for better or worse remains to be seen.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Now you're comparing apples to oranges because there are nitpicks and there are complete character overhauls that make them not even look like super heroes.

No it's not. The point is that 15 years, 20 years, or 1 representation.

The truth is that some people will always want what's in the comics. Something not sourced will always be met with, "why couldn't they just...." Despite the fact other media have often added to comics by not coming from the source.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I'm fine with reasonable changes. I'm fine with a Neutral Zone origin, and if they had matching blue flight suits, I wouldn't be b****ing that they didn't have '4's.

This film doesn't feel like FF to me in anything but the most superficial ways and that's my problem. I don't need it to be 100% , but I'd like it to be higher than 25%.

That's fine.

I consider the Ultimate U a valid source for reference as well. Same with Black Fury or Ultimate Falcon costume.

I didn't need to see their 616 counterparts first or think using their Ultimate version means the 616 is stupid or disrespectful(it's not).

So 25% 616 and 50% UFF is an okay ratio for me.

 

[Tony Stark]

No it's not. The point is that 15 years, 20 years, or 1 representation.

The truth is that some people will always want what's in the comics. Something not sourced will always be met with, "why couldn't they just...." Despite the fact other media have often added to comics by not coming from the source.

The costumes in the Story films weren't from the comics, but they were influenced by the comics. The containment suits aren't in any way influenced by the comics, 616 or Ultimate.

The Spider-man outfit is irrelevant. The Raimi films used a design influenced by the comics. The first Webb film used one that more deviated from the design, but still had all the elements. In TASM2 they went to a design more similar to the Raimi films with bigger eye lenses.

You need to understand the difference between influenced and 'directly taken from'. The FF have had multiple outfits over the years, no one is saying to represent one specific one, we just want one that is reflective of the books, either Ultimate or 616.

 

[Kelly]

That's fine.

I consider the Ultimate U a valid source for reference as well. Same with Black Fury or Ultimate Falcon costume.

I didn't need to see their 616 counterparts first or think using their Ultimate version means the 616 is stupid or disrespectful(it's not).

So 25% 616 and 50% UFF is an okay ratio for me.

What is 25% 616?

Sue is invisible
Ben is rock strong
Reed is stretchy
Johnny is on fire

???????

Because as far as I'm concerned, that is not 25%.....and I would much rather have some of the relationship elements from the MK series than either 616 or UFF...they were far more complex in the MK than the other two IMO, and if you want a slightly darker movie, but with a lot of the elements of UFF and 616...well, then a base from the MK series IMO would have been a better place to start from, and you would not have had as much push back from the more longtime fans. MK Fantastic Four 1,2,3,4 arc is far darker than anything that the Ultimate put out, except maybe the Zombie crap. And yet MKFF 1,2,3,4 held strong to the elements from 616.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

was Marvel Knights FF technically another continuity other than 616? Because i know Marvel Knights Spider-Man was still very much 616...

because i thought the entire MK was 616, just a more "mature" format for story telling.. thus the MK label.

EDIT:

Yeah, Kelly the MK is still 100% 616.. so that 4 issue F4 run, is 616 continuity.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

What is 25% 616?

Sue is invisible
Ben is rock strong
Reed is stretchy
Johnny is on fire

???????

.

i'm just using WL's number.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

The costumes in the Story films weren't from the comics, but they were influenced by the comics. The containment suits aren't in any way influenced by the comics, 616 or Ultimate.

The Spider-man outfit is irrelevant. The Raimi films used a design influenced by the comics. The first Webb film used one that more deviated from the design, but still had all the elements. In TASM2 they went to a design more similar to the Raimi films with bigger eye lenses.

You need to understand the difference between influenced and 'directly taken from'. The FF have had multiple outfits over the years, no one is saying to represent one specific one, we just want one that is reflective of the books, either Ultimate or 616.

I understand. You seem to want to fight about an argument I'm not making.

Again. My point is whether or not something being faithfully adapted will then allow for something not faithful in future interpretations. As if some valve is released.

At this point, we've had three faithful Jokers. Leto's look if anything is simply different. Yet the reaction is still largely based on "why not"

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

So I've gone back and fourth on this movie (pun intended). Originally I thought it was a good idea because of the terrible Tim Story films. Then they started coming out with news and I completely lost all interest.

Now I'm not sure...

Pros
+ Trailers. have all been great to me. The monster/sci-fi stuff is cool, the visuals look great. The tone is that ol' dark n' gritty we all love... heh. JK but even that doesn't really bother me. I like the realism and it's certainly more thrilling than the PG tone of the last couple.
+ Powers. I really like what I just heard about Reed's powers. The spatial warp lends itself to more intrigue than cellular flexibility imo. Can't wait to see that. And CGI Thing was what I always wanted, he looks great, constantly shifting, etc.
+ Dimensional > Cosmic. I always preferred the Negative Zone to the Cosmic radiation origin. I would like to see it done justice on screen.
+ Costumes. Sorry everyone, but I love them. They are exactly what I wanted to see. Harnessed haz-mat type suits. Not leotards.

Neutral
= Youth. I never really cared one way or another. I like middle-aged Reed in the comics, but it'll be interesting see them all grow up together. If the series goes onto have sequels.
= Interracial family. I care very little about this, since the discovery that the Storms are still father/brother/sister.
= Actors. I dont love Mara or Teller, but the rest of them are solid and while they might be perfect adaptations, they might surprise me... I suppose.

Cons
- Doom. Which brings me back to the reason I can't bring myself to go pay for this movie. Sorry Trank. Better luck next time.
- No MCU connection. Then there's the fact that we won't see them with the rest of the Marvel U. C'mon Fox, let's make a deal.

 

[Kelly]

was Marvel Knights FF technically another continuity other than 616? Because i know Marvel Knights Spider-Man was still very much 616...

because i thought the entire MK was 616, just a more "mature" format for story telling.. thus the MK label.

EDIT:

Yeah, Kelly the MK is still 100% 616.. so that 4 issue F4 run, is 616 continuity.

Yes same continuity, but very different type of writing. The MK really spent a lot of time on their relationships...and Sue was much more independent.

 

[Tony Stark]

I understand. You seem to want to fight about an argument I'm not making.

Again. My point is whether or not something being faithfully adapted will then allow for something not faithful in future interpretations. As if some valve is released.

At this point, we've had three faithful Jokers. Leto's look if anything is simply different. Yet the reaction is still largely based on "why not"

Well it's a little hard to know what your position is when you put up straw men arguments. Again no one is saying it can't be different. Using YOUR example, when I see Leto's Joker, yes it's unlike anything we've seen, and yet when I look at it, there are enough elements that I say, "yeah I can see where it's the Joker", do I like it? Not really at the moment. But going further with what you said, the things I don't like about it, I'm not going to forgive because "we've already had a faithful joker".

Also that was a shock value picture, I doubt he'll go around the whole time without a shirt on. They wanted to show the tattoos.

With this film the objection is that it looks like a generic sci-fi suit. There's nothing to identify it to the team.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Well it's a little hard to know what your position is when you put up straw men arguments. Again no one is saying it can't be different. Using YOUR example, when I see Leto's Joker, yes it's unlike anything we've seen, and yet when I look at it, there are enough elements that I say, "yeah I can see where it's the Joker", do I like it? Not really at the moment. But going further with what you said, the things I don't like about it, I'm not going to forgive because "we've already had a faithful joker".

Also that was a shock value picture, I doubt he'll go around the whole time without a shirt on. They wanted to show the tattoos.

With this film the objection is that it looks like a generic sci-fi suit. There's nothing to identify it to the team.

No one is putting up straw arguments. My first comment was "i'm not picking on you cause everyone is different" The general sentiment comes up on all the boards which is what I was addressing.


I'm not saying anyone should be okay with this FF. That's why I never mentioned, "you guys should be okay with Trank."

I'm more annoyed that that argument never seems to come up in favor of something new, ala Miles Morales or John Stewart which is sourced from the comics. Only appearing in favor of getting some mythical "faithful adaptation."

 

[C. Lee]

John Stewart has been in the comics since the early 70's. He has been in the books and has been a main character in many of the DC animated series and movies. Miles I know less about. As far as I know he has been in the comics for a couple of years, and in no other media. To me, if one of these two were to be in a major motion picture, I would definitely say Stewart should be it. And as a matter of fact, I would like to see a John Stewart as GL movie.

Now as to the FF. There has been 54 years of the classic FF (which has been generally loved by a wide swath of the audience) and there have been 2 years of the UFF (which was widely disliked by the general audience, and liked by a small group of fans). Of the 2....I want to see a classic FF movie adaptation done right.

 

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

Trailer will play in front of Ultron in the US.
http://digitalcinema.bydeluxe.com/site/dlxportal/docs/Trailers_By_Deluxe-_WK_18_US.pdf

So much for Ike.

 

[Tony Stark]

Trailer will play in front of Ultron in the US.
http://digitalcinema.bydeluxe.com/site/dlxportal/docs/Trailers_By_Deluxe-_WK_18_US.pdf

So much for Ike.

You need to reread that. Noticably absent is AMC the largest US theater chain. No one said Disney had the power to stop the trailer from being shown. It's up to individual theater chains. Looks like Regal, Cinemark, Carmike, Marcus will be showing it.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

John Stewart has been in the comics since the early 70's. He has been in the books and has been a main character in many of the DC animated series and movies. Miles I know less about. As far as I know he has been in the comics for a couple of years, and in no other media. To me, if one of these two were to be in a major motion picture, I would definitely say Stewart should be it. And as a matter of fact, I would like to see a John Stewart as GL movie.

Both should have a shot if someone has an interesting story to tell.

Maybe it's just me, but I've enjoyed RDJ's Tony. I may not have loved the trilogy but it some upstart director wanted to do an Iron Man story with an Asian male lead unconnected to anything except using the Ultimate Iron Man armor. Go for it. That's what the 'if,then' argument seems to entail.

Yet I feel like the push back would be, "RDJ was great but he never really pushed the extent of what Iron Man could do, like going into space, sci-fi stories, or fighting FinFang Foom. Once we do that then, we can do some alternate stuff."

So the point was never about faithful Iron Man.

Maybe it's just paranoia on my part. lol

 

[Tony Stark]

No one is putting up straw arguments. My first comment was "i'm not picking on you cause everyone is different" The general sentiment comes up on all the boards which is what I was addressing.


I'm not saying anyone should be okay with this FF. That's why I never mentioned, "you guys should be okay with Trank."

I'm more annoyed that that argument never seems to come up in favor of something new, ala Miles Morales or John Stewart which is sourced from the comics. Only appearing in favor of getting some mythical "faithful adaptation."

What is considered "faithful" is going to be up to public opinion. There does tend to be a general consensus on what is faithful when it comes to these properties. A Spider-man film that does not have Peter Parker is not going to be considered faithful. Sorry but that's the truth of it. Now could they make Peter Parker a black teenager? That's another question, and debatable.

Again you're putting up a straw man in saying that people don't want something new. Again I point to Daredevil where the Netflix series is new and very different from the Affleck movie and preferred. Batman Begins was new and very different from Burton's take. But both of those endeavors have generally been considered faithful to the source material.

Catwoman is an example where they did something new, and it was not faithful and the fans revolted. i'm not saying this film has gone to that extreme, but it's closer than I'd like it to be.

 

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

You need to reread that. Noticably absent is AMC the largest US theater chain. No one said Disney had the power to stop the trailer from being shown. It's up to individual theater chains. Looks like Regal, Cinemark, Carmike, Marcus will be showing it.

"Fantastic Four TLR C" will probably play at AMC theaters.

And no, people definitely have said Disney/Marvel has so much power over theater chains that they decide what trailers are allowed.

 

[starscream22]

John Stewart has been in the comics since the early 70's. He has been in the books and has been a main character in many of the DC animated series and movies. Miles I know less about. As far as I know he has been in the comics for a couple of years, and in no other media. To me, if one of these two were to be in a major motion picture, I would definitely say Stewart should be it. And as a matter of fact, I would like to see a John Stewart as GL movie.

Now as to the FF. There has been 54 years of the classic FF (which has been generally loved by a wide swath of the audience) and there have been 2 years of the UFF (which was widely disliked by the general audience, and liked by a small group of fans). Of the 2....I want to see a classic FF movie adaptation done right.

Okay so with that in mind, are you still going to go see this anyway?

There seems to be a whole lot of people making good points for being vegan while still showing up at Arby's these days.....

All I'm saying is that you can't be on the PETA board rocking a Mike Vick Jersey and expect to be taken seriously. Not you per say just the whiff in the air I guess....