Fantastic Four Reboot

[Brian2887]

Reed Richards - Jude Law (The Talented Mr. Ripley)

Sue Storm - January Jones (Mad Men)

Johnny Storm - Eric Christian Olsen (Fired Up)

Ben Grimm - Dominic Purcell (Prison Break)

Dr. Doom - Tom Hardy (Bronson)

Mole Man - Timothy Spall (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban)

Namor - Jonathan Rhys Meyers (The Tudors)

 

[Chris Wallace]

Not saying he should play him, but maybe he could.
He just reminds me of Reed Richards here.

I think there should be a federal law preventing him from going anywhere near a comic book franchise ever again.

 

[GL1]

Sue Storm - January Jones (Mad Men)

Ben Grimm - Dominic Purcell (Prison Break)

Mole Man - Timothy Spall (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban)

Namor - Jonathan Rhys Meyers (The Tudors)

Great picks! I'd go older for Reed, younger for Johnny, though. For example:

Reed Richards

Johnny Storm - Emile Hirsch

I'd channel Vader and have a physical actor, someone on Andy Serkis' level, voiced by Keith David while pre-mask Victor could be played by someone completely different, perhaps the same actor you suggest.

Eh, why not go further.

Alicia Masters - Summer Glau

 

[JAK®]

I think there should be a federal law preventing him from going anywhere near a comic book franchise ever again.

It really annoys me when people blame Clooney for Batman & Robin. All the problems in that movie had nothing to do with him, and his body of work outside of that film speaks for itself.

 

[The Overlord]

See people keep on putting up Mole Man casting picks, but still no one has described how he is interesting personality wise.

In the comics, most of the time, he comes across as a plot device rather then a character. He comes across as the guy who controls monsters and that's it. It seems very rare that they actually delve into his personality. I mean why does he want revenge on surface world? Because he's ugly? That's pretty lame. Is there any particular tragic event that made him distant from humanity or did he just get stood up at his senior prom and never got over it?

Besides the fact he controls monsters what makes him interesting? Controlling monsters is just the gimmick, it doesn't make his personality interesting.

 

[bubbadoom]

Maybe the Mole Man could be a frustrated artist - no, wait, wasn't that was Hitler's motivation, never mind...

 

[The Overlord]

Maybe the Mole Man could be a frustrated artist - no, wait, wasn't that was Hitler's motivation, never mind...

Cute but that doesn't answer my question. I never understood how he was anything more then a plot device in the comics or why he was compelling enough as a character to carry a whole movie by something.

Hitler is at least a very evil and terrifying figure, what's Mole Man supposed to be?

 

[Jordacar]

Maybe they could turn Mole Man into a Col. Kurtz type.

Only with monsters instead of VC.

 

[GL1]

See people keep on putting up Mole Man casting picks, but still no one has described how he is interesting personality wise.

In the comics, most of the time, he comes across as a plot device rather then a character. He comes across as the guy who controls monsters and that's it. It seems very rare that they actually delve into his personality. I mean why does he want revenge on surface world? Because he's ugly? That's pretty lame. Is there any particular tragic event that made him distant from humanity or did he just get stood up at his senior prom and never got over it?

Besides the fact he controls monsters what makes him interesting? Controlling monsters is just the gimmick, it doesn't make his personality interesting.

Good and fair point. The Ultimate comics took a fair crack at it, making him a laughingstock in the scientific community, and just generally being 'that guy' on top of the typical freudian instability.

I have to admit, in my version, he'd be a bit of a lackey as well, a "Mr. Smee" of sorts. Basically someone like 90% of Timothy Spall's other characters, lol. But it is something a movie-maker would have to pay special attention to.

Taking a crack at it now, I think Mole Man works as a trancendant visionary, someone who really believes the science he's investigating is for the betterment of mankind, in direct contrast with Doom, who works science to his own ends. The monsters that MoleMan unearths and experiments with are side effects, or perhaps created with a remorseful acceptance that many people must die to further the human race, not due to the invaluability of human life, but rather due to the immense importance of the scientific discovery at play. To him, it's like testing an FTL device even though it will kill thousands. It's hard to respect every single human life when you're on the cusp of rewriting the rules of science, and indeed, galactic history. That's where Elder/Molkevic is, mentally.

In that end, he feels that he's transcended traditional moral obligations and feels he has a higher moral obligation to, perhaps reality itself. Perhaps the mole men aren't just automatons, perhaps he's stumbled upon the spark of life that allows him to grant sentience, self-awareness, and etcetera. That's a good angle, as it is a significant discovery to theoretically warrant such a ruthless attitude, and it explains the molemen, as well as creating a disturbing conundrum and question when it comes to defeating and indeed destroying these enemies. Also, it brings more precedence to his transcendence and evilness, as one who can create life may then not have such respect for it.

Perhaps it even lends to the FF's family theme, as it highlights that the value of life is not in the science, but in the connections between people.

 

[nephron]

Oh boy. Here we go again.

"Whathisname from Currently Popular TV Show should be Reed!"

"No way, it should definitely be Flavor of The Month Movie Star!"

Yuck.

Right now I'm more interested in the story. The FF is my favorite Marvel comic, and probably my favorite comic. Great characters, the best villains in all of Comic-dom, and some of the craziest, most imaginative, fantastic story arcs of all time.

The last two FF movies were.....well....it's probably not accurate to say "they sucked". Batman & Robin sucked. Catwoman sucked. Elektra sucked. The FF movies just weren't very good. Granted, what they did to Dr. Doom & Galactus sucked so hard it was criminal, but putting that aside, the FF movies weren't bad, they just weren't very good. They were bland and uninteresting. Not compelling.

They were entirely forgettable.

Why? One possible reason is that Tim Story & Co. seemed to focus on the wrong things. I remember before the first one came out. I was all excited about it, so I was keeping up with the buzz. Story kept saying stuff like "The important thing about the FF is that they're a family, so this movie's going to be about how they get along (and how they don't get along) together." Story didn't lie. That's basically what those flicks were about, and it made for 2 entirely forgettable movies.

So if they reboot the FF, perhaps they should consider coming at it from a different angle, and not be so concerned with the FF's status as "a family". I think one could argue that that's never been what the FF's been about at its core, anyway. Yes, they're kind of a family (sort of), but not really. Technically, the only two who are related are Johnny & Sue. (before Reed & Sue got married, of course). I mean, in real life, if I'm hanging out with my friend, my girlfriend, and her brother, are the four of us really a "family"? Not really. Even if we all get a place together, "family" probably isn't the right word. The point is, "The-FF-is-a-family" is an idea that probably gets too much emphasis. There's more to the FF than that, and ultimately, Tim Story made 2 movies built around the idea, and they weren't very good. Time to try something else. But what?

What else is noteworthy about the FF besides them being a "family"?

How about the FF's status as explorers? Mark Waid wrote an interesting little essay during his run as the FF's writer, & he pointed out that the FF isn't really a crimefighting team. They don't go on patrol, and they don't really engage in detective work or sleuthing. But they do explore all sorts of crazy, fantastic places. Look where they've been....Outer Space, alien worlds, other times, The Negative Zone, Wakanda, Latveria, the Microverse, Attilan, the subterranean kingdom of the Mole-Man, Atlantis, the Moon, Monster Island(!)....the list goes on an on. And part of exploring wondrous and amazing places is meeting wondrous and amazing friends and foes like the Watcher, Dr. Doom, the Black Panther, Galactus, the Inhumans, the Sub-Mariner, the High Evolutionary, the Mole Man, the Skrulls, Ego the Living Planet...the list goes on and on.

So maybe this new film should stop being so preoccupied with the "FF as a family", and start thinking about the "FF as explorers". Maybe they should stop thinking in terms of "they might not always get along, but they still love each other", and start thinking in terms of "the important thing about the FF is that their adventures take us to far-out places so insanely cool and beyond-the-ordinary they make Avatar's Pandora look like the DMV...fantastic places we can only marvel at."

If they start with that in mind, and make that the basis around which they frame everything else, we might actually get a compelling, exciting adventure story instead of another bland family sitcom.

 

[Chris Wallace]

It really annoys me when people blame Clooney for Batman & Robin. All the problems in that movie had nothing to do with him, and his body of work outside of that film speaks for itself.

He was a terrible Batman, and he blamed himself for that debacle.

 

[Obi-Ron]

So if they reboot the FF, perhaps they should consider coming at it from a different angle, and not be so concerned with the FF's status as "a family". I think one could argue that that's never been what the FF's been about at its core, anyway.

Fantastic fail.

 

[JAK®]

He was a terrible Batman, and he blamed himself for that debacle.

But was he really a terrible Batman? There wasn't anything about his performance that was good or bad. He just read his lines. Everything that fans complain about, the rubber nipples, neon lights, bad writing and campy atmosphere was completely independent from Clooney. Christian Bale could've been cast in that movie and it wouldn't have made a bit of difference. Am I saying that Clooney nailed the role? Definitely not. But he never had a chance when he was in that movie.

Yeah, he blames himself but that's him being humble.

 

[bubbadoom]

Clooney was the least of the problems with B&R, and I think he looked the best in the bat suit of anyone up to that point in time.

 

[nephron]

Fantastic fail.

Explain.

 

[Obi-Ron]

What's to explain? The FF is all about family.

 

[Franklin Richards]

A team--and a family--of adventurers, explorers and
imaginauts, the Fantastic Four lead lives both ordinary--
and extraordinary.

 

[nephron]

What's to explain? The FF is all about family.

Maybe now. "The FF is all about family" is certainly what people tend to think about the FF today, but I would argue that that aspect of the FF has been over-emphasized and blown way out of proportion compared to the original concept.

Are they about family? Sure, I suppose it's a fair classification if not exactly, technically accurate. Are they all about family? I don't think so. At least, not originally, and the FF as a franchise would probably be more entertaining and more successful if filmmakers would back off from that angle a little bit.

Again, consider that the group we're talking about consists of a guy, his girlfriend, his buddy, and his girlfriend's brother. How many groups of people like that have you known that consider themselves a family? I used to live with my girlfriend and her brother. Sometimes a good friend would come over. I don't think "family" would be the most accurate word to describe all of us. It's close, just not the best word.

I doubt that when the FF was being conceived, they were conceived as a "super hero family". Rather, it looks like Stan was just trying to come up with a realistic situation for these 4 people to know each other, as opposed to a bunch of super-heroes banding together just because, like the Justice League, or the Avengers.

Then look at the stories. Look at the Lee/Kirby run. Yes, there's some fun stuff in those stories that deal with how the FF does and does not get along. Yes, there's a family element to the FF, and yes, it's important. But it's not at all accurate to say the original Lee/Kirby run was all about family. It was about other things just as much, if not more.

The FF was the first "Marvel" title, and Stan has said over and over again that Marvel's big breakthrough was crafting stories about superheroes with realistic problems and personalities, as opposes to 1-dimensional, perfect, problem-less characters. The FF had to pay their rent, Ben was miserable looking like a monster...the FF was the first superho-hero comic to inject some measure of realistically mundane problems into the superhero mileu. That's what Marve & the FF were all about. Is that the same thing as being "all about family"? Not really. Now, when the comic is about a team, those things are closely related, but they're not really the same thing.

Also, the FF was about exploration, and taking the reader to weird, exciting places. Compare the FF, with say, Batman or Spider-Man. Pick up a random issue of Batman - he's probably in Gotham City. Spider-Man's probably in New York. Pick up a random issue of the FF, and they're just as like to be in some bizarre, extraordinary, exotic place as they are to be in New York.

When you read the original Lee/Kirby run, there's little to indicate that the core-concept of the FF is the theme of a "super-family". Again, it's an element, but by no means the main element.

I don't know exactly how or why this notion that the FF is "all about family" took root, but at some point it did. Probably the same mechanism by which Wolverine's super-healing was scaled up to the point of ridiculosity. For some reason, writers latched on to one particular thing about a character(s), became fixated on that one thing, and blew it way out of proportion.

Anyway...regardless whether you agree or disagree with my points, they already made a couple FF movies based on the "FF as a family" premise, and those movies weren't very good. Maybe if they'd back off from that angle, and emphasize some other aspect of the FF, we'd get a better, more exciting, adventuresome story.

 

[bubbadoom]

There is a difference in doing a film "about family," and making it a "family" film.
The Godfather is a film about family, but it is not juvenile in any way.
They can keep the "family" aspects of the FF, but they need to make it much more mature.
Not "Dark Knight" mature, but at least "Iron Man" mature.

 

[nephron]

There is a difference in doing a film "about family," and making it a "family" film.
The Godfather is a film about family, but it is not juvenile in any way.
They can keep the "family" aspects of the FF, but they need to make it much more mature.
Not "Dark Knight" mature, but at least "Iron Man" mature.

Agreed.

The problem, I think, is that the family-sitcom-vibe is what they were after from the very beginning. That's why they hired Tim Story in the first place. I remember reading somewhere that Story was hired because the producers thought, based on Barbershop, that Story would be adept at capturing that kind of "they don't always get along, but they still love each other"-Family Ties-kind of vibe. And Tim Story said stuff like "The most important thing about the FF is that they're a family". So that's the direction the movies were intended to take from day one. It turned out to make for 2 rather bland movies.

Your analogy about the Godfather and the distinction between a silly family story vs an adult family story is a good one, and a point well taken. I wouldn't complain if we got an exciting, compelling family story so long as it was exciting and compelling. Of course this means they'd have to devote more of the story to adventure and plot, and less to family-relationships, which in turn means we'd still be talking about backing off from the family-angle in favor of giving more attention to a different theme or approach.

 

[bubbadoom]

thanks nephron, I agree with your points as well. "family" may have been one aspect of the FF, but certainly not the key aspect. I too question when that notion too hold.

 

[hippie_hunter]

But was he really a terrible Batman? There wasn't anything about his performance that was good or bad. He just read his lines. Everything that fans complain about, the rubber nipples, neon lights, bad writing and campy atmosphere was completely independent from Clooney. Christian Bale could've been cast in that movie and it wouldn't have made a bit of difference. Am I saying that Clooney nailed the role? Definitely not. But he never had a chance when he was in that movie.

Yeah, he blames himself but that's him being humble.

Clooney was a horrible Batman. However, the man was and dare I say still is, the epitome of Bruce Wayne.

 

[TheVileOne]

What kind of made me angry is at the end of FF2 when Ben was asking Reed and Sue, like what about you guys wanting to have kids and start a family and everything?

To me the only logical answer at this point would've been, "We already are a family." Or "We already have a family." Instead I think Reed said something like oh there will be plenty of time to start a family later.

It just kind of reiterated that these guys did NOT in fact get the Fantastic Four. It's not that they are starting a family. THEY ARE A FAMILY! And sometimes family means more than just blood ties. That's why Ben is just as much a part of the family as everyone else.

 

[Kelly]

I agree, I think they missed the true family aspect. But, not in that line...

I think they missed it from the start...especially with the relationship between Ben and Sue. IMO, that is one of the sweetest friendships in all of comicdom....and they totally missed it. That was one of several things actually...

But, IMO, the actors got it, the writers did not.

 

[GL1]

But, IMO, the actors got it, the writers did not.

This is profoundly true. Listening to the actors I really thought that FF was going to really hit the mark. Talk about Sue/Alba being maternal, and a general familiarity between the characters was just awesome.

---

I don't agree that the focus needs to be taken 'off of family.' I think the two main themes of the FF: exploration and family, are complimentary and supplimentary when done right. I think that when you take a bunch of people, especially people who are already deeply connected, and put them on a fantastical journey that this automatically engenders a growth and exploration of those relationships. Unless you're making a wall-to-wall action film.

I think focusing on the exploration without the focus on true family (as opposed to Sitcom family, like the forgettable movies did) will make an equally bland and forgettable film. Imagine AVATAR without the connections between the characters. Great spectacle. Or maybe just add in the obligatory love story. Give a nod for SFX, and otherwise: forgetable.

The vibe that the movies missed is that band of brothers type vibe. You have four people, who are already tied together for life who then have this profound common experience. That idea, when portrayed well, is simply not forgetable, even if the movie is set entirely in NYC. But when portrayed correctly, it does require that those relationships be sorely tested, something that can't happen to epic superheroes in NYC. Especially by one guy with electric powers.