Fantastic Four reborn! - - - - Part 13

[Krystal]

That article is a little missleading...
While the budget did rise from $80 million to $100 million, there were no major changes to the third act. Reed hardly stretches at all in the film, though he does finally do something "fantastic" at the end while battling Doom.
The only real difference was that a scene in which Ben saves a cat from a tree was cut as there was a very similar scene in THE INCREDIBLES.

So basically you're saying the article is false.

 

[Ant-manic]

But I, personally, have a problem with that. Doom became Doom at a very young age. Like Hitler, like Stalin, like Saddam Hussein, he saw as a child how some people call the shots and how other, weaker men have to live in that world.

So he, at a young age, after seeing that injustice, decided he would be the one calling the shots. That's how real supervillains are born. They're not the result of some lab accident. FF annual #2 showed a real insight into the mind of a dictator and that should be the basis of any proper Doom treatment.

Doom wasn't normal when he met Reed in college. He was already Doom, he just hadn't fully fulfilled his destiny yet.

I've read and own Books of Doom. he was always arrogant, ambitious, and contemptuous of humanity. but he wasn't Doctor Doom until he donned that armor and took Latveria. I've seen nothing to suggest that it won't be the same way with Kebbell. he'll be an angry super genius with designs on the world who discovers the opportunity to make put those plans into action. it was just as true of the Ultimate version of doom as the 616.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

That's the problem with getting people to make the movie who don't know it's history or comic history.

Yeah. We don't really know a lot yet, so we can take that little bit of information and imagine the best or imagine the worst.

But based on the comments I'm hearing, one broad truth is that those involved don't really understand who the FF are. I don't know how we can hope they'll give us the good things we're hoping for when they haven't communicated even a minimal understanding of what those good things are.

Through the first film, I read a lot of promising comments, but when I saw the final product, I felt I had been lied to. This time they don't even seem to understand the basics well enough to lie to us.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Here's a challenge for those supporting this effort. Give me one quote that illustrates they 'Get It'. Give me something that, as spoken - without your spin or interpretation - illustrates a deep knowledge of who these characters are.

I could give you 20 quotes that would make us question if they get it. Can you give me 20 (or even 1) to the contrary? Here's just one, for example, that they don't get it:

"They’re older than high school, but they’re not quite grown into the world. If anything, this is a coming of age story." - Simon Kinberg

 

[Kelly]

Well, for the UFF? That is a pretty good description.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Well, for the UFF? That is a pretty good description.

Yeah, but UFF didn't help define the Silver Age of comics. UFF didn't have a 50 year run as one of the top comic books going. Few if any kids fidgeted through their Tuesday classes looking forward to getting out and heading straight to the newstand to see if the latest UFF issue was out.

Some of the biggest problems with the first two films can be traced to UFF.

So in short, if this film will be heavily based on UFF, I don't believe the people making it 'get it'.

 

[Joe Rockhead]

The biggest mistake in the first movies, and it looks like in this movie as well, is the combining Doom's origin with the Fantastic Four origin.

It's a problem of character motivations post accidents.

When they're separate, from the original series, Reed points to Doom's miscalculations, is chastised by Doom, then Doom blows himself up. Reed was right, Doom was wrong, and Doom wrongly blames Reed for the accident. Doom's vanity won't let him see it any other way.
At the same time, Reed miscalculates the affect of the cosmic ray storm on the ship and occupants, and Ben gets horribly transformed. Ben rightly feels that Reed caused the change, and Reed bears the full weight of guilt for the incident.

When you combine their origins - how can Reed both be right and wrong at the same time? Did Reed miscalculate, causing both Ben's and Doom's transformation? Or did Doom cause the accident, thereby absolving Reed of any blame for both?

Unfortunately, in the interest of getting BOTH origin stories told in one fell swoop - Bendis and Millar combined the 2 in UFF, and that's the origin that fits best in a single film.

As much as Galactus is Armageddon personified, he is NOT the big-bad of the Fantastic Four. Any film series should build towards that. If I were to plan the series, I would have a flashback sequence of Reed pointing out Doom's errors before being blown up, then Doom would be kicked out of whatever organization they both belong to. He shouldn't be seen again in the first movie, except maybe in a post-credit teaser.

Save Doom for sequels.

 

[EssayM]

Here's my take:

At this stage of production, it is impossible for us to know what will be with a movie. You can say it's a terrible concept, but who thought The Lego Movie would be huge when it was first announced? You can say the casting makes no sense, but Heath Ledger, Michael Keaton, yadda yadda yadda. You can say the production schedule sounds like a nightmare, but Jaws and Star Wars had terrible productions. Even a set photo, while it may give you an idea of the costumes and effects they're using, still gives you an incomplete view of what the final product will be.

In my mind, it's when you see an official photo or, better yet, a trailer - when you see a sample of what will actually be on screen - that you can begin to fairly judge a movie. Yes, trailers lie, but they're still portraying what the filmmakers consider the best aspects of the movie, and if you hate those aspects, you probably won't like the movie itself any better.

So right now, I can't judge this movie, because I have next to no idea how everything they're talking about will play onscreen. It could be amazing, it could be just passable, it could even be god-awful...but I won't know until I see the characters move, hear them talk, get a sense of the tone and atmosphere the movie is trying to convey. If it seems like something I can't support - if they make it look like a dumb stoner comedy or, worse, a boring action movie - I will know to give up on it and not waste my time and money any further. If, on the other hand, it looks like an enjoyable film that shows an awareness of its source material, I might be interested to take a look. It's that simple.

That's really all I have to say at this point.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Here's my take:

At this stage of production, it is impossible for us to know what will be with a movie. You can say it's a terrible concept, but who thought The Lego Movie would be huge when it was first announced? You can say the casting makes no sense, but Heath Ledger, Michael Keaton, yadda yadda yadda. You can say the production schedule sounds like a nightmare, but Jaws and Star Wars had terrible productions. Even a set photo, while it may give you an idea of the costumes and effects they're using, still gives you an incomplete view of what the final product will be.

In my mind, it's when you see an official photo or, better yet, a trailer - when you see a sample of what will actually be on screen - that you can begin to fairly judge a movie. Yes, trailers lie, but they're still portraying what the filmmakers consider the best aspects of the movie, and if you hate those aspects, you probably won't like the movie itself any better.

So right now, I can't judge this movie, because I have next to no idea how everything they're talking about will play onscreen. It could be amazing, it could be just passable, it could even be god-awful...but I won't know until I see the characters move, hear them talk, get a sense of the tone and atmosphere the movie is trying to convey. If it seems like something I can't support - if they make it look like a dumb stoner comedy or, worse, a boring action movie - I will know to give up on it and not waste my time and money any further. If, on the other hand, it looks like an enjoyable film that shows an awareness of its source material, I might be interested to take a look. It's that simple.

That's really all I have to say at this point.

These are all fair points, but I think there are a couple different questions here:

1. Is it possible for this to be a very good movie? Yes. I still think Josh Trank is a talented director and the cast has talent. The budget is low for a superhero film, but it could be a good film that does different things from other superhero films. Jeremy Slater is unknown, so the script could be good or bad.


But that question is not what I, personally, am interested in. There are 100 movies that will be coming out that could be good, but I don't follow them and research them and discuss them on forums. I'll see them when they come out and judge them for what they are.

The much more important question to me is:

2. Will this film capture the elements of the Fantastic Four that made me enjoy the comics as a kid and had me hoping for the past 40 plus years for something that will display those elements in a film format?

With each new bit of information we get I become more skeptical that I'll get what I want. And if I'm not going to get what I want, I'm probably wasting my time checking in here every day.

I started reading and posting on these forums a little over 11 years ago because I thought I might FINALLY, after waiting for most of my life, get an FF film that captured the elements that so intrigued me as a child and spent so much time dancing around in my brain.

The first movie (not counting the Corman effort) was a disappointment. The second movie was a disappointment. When I heard that Trank was directing this one and Stentz and Miller were working on a script, I was at the height of my optimism for this latest effort.

But then the Stentz and Miller script was thrown out and they brought in an unknown to write a new script. Nearly every single bit of news I've heard from that moment until right now has been disappointing (to me from my specific perspective of wanting a film faithful to the FF I grew up with).

It's still possible that there will be some elements of this film that will give me a small taste of what I want. But it seems clear now, based on all the information we now know, that the goals of the film-makers are pretty far off from the things I had hoped I would see.

 

[Dark Raven]

Here's my take:

At this stage of production, it is impossible for us to know what will be with a movie. You can say it's a terrible concept, but who thought The Lego Movie would be huge when it was first announced? You can say the casting makes no sense, but Heath Ledger, Michael Keaton, yadda yadda yadda. You can say the production schedule sounds like a nightmare, but Jaws and Star Wars had terrible productions. Even a set photo, while it may give you an idea of the costumes and effects they're using, still gives you an incomplete view of what the final product will be.

In my mind, it's when you see an official photo or, better yet, a trailer - when you see a sample of what will actually be on screen - that you can begin to fairly judge a movie. Yes, trailers lie, but they're still portraying what the filmmakers consider the best aspects of the movie, and if you hate those aspects, you probably won't like the movie itself any better.

So right now, I can't judge this movie, because I have next to no idea how everything they're talking about will play onscreen. It could be amazing, it could be just passable, it could even be god-awful...but I won't know until I see the characters move, hear them talk, get a sense of the tone and atmosphere the movie is trying to convey. If it seems like something I can't support - if they make it look like a dumb stoner comedy or, worse, a boring action movie - I will know to give up on it and not waste my time and money any further. If, on the other hand, it looks like an enjoyable film that shows an awareness of its source material, I might be interested to take a look. It's that simple.

That's really all I have to say at this point.

There's nothing special about your post that says you had to have said any of that.

These are all fair points, but I think there are a couple different questions here:

1. Is it possible for this to be a very good movie? Yes. I still think Josh Trank is a talented director and the cast has talent. The budget is low for a superhero film, but it could be a good film that does different things from other superhero films. Jeremy Slater is unknown, so the script could be good or bad.


But that question is not what I, personally, am interested in. There are 100 movies that will be coming out that could be good, but I don't follow them and research them and discuss them on forums. I'll see them when they come out and judge them for what they are.

The much more important question to me is:

2. Will this film capture the elements of the Fantastic Four that made me enjoy the comics as a kid and had me hoping for the past 40 plus years for a film that will display those elements in a film format?

With each new bit of information we get I become more skeptical that I'll get what I want. And if I'm not going to get what I want, I'm probably wasting my time checking in here every day.

I started reading and posting on these forums a little over 11 years ago because I thought I might FINALLY, after waiting for most of my life, get an FF film that captured the elements that so intrigued me as a child and spent so much time dancing around in my brain.

The first movie (not counting the Corman effort) was a disappointment. The second movie was a disappointment. When I heard that Trank was directing this one and Stentz and Miller were working on a script, I was at the height of my optimism for this latest effort.

But then the Stentz and Miller script was thrown out and they brought in an unknown to write a new script. Nearly every single bit of news I've heard from that moment until right now has been disappointing (to me from my specific perspective of wanting a film faithful to the FF I grew up with).

It's still possible that there will be some elements of this film that will give me a small taste of what I want. But it seems clear now, based on all the information we now know, that the goals of the film-makers are pretty far off from the things I had hoped I would see.

What is there inherent about your fandom that says you can't actually have enjoyed the first two movies, are very excited about this new movie and will plan to see it four times?

 

[The Guard]

I've read and own Books of Doom. he was always arrogant, ambitious, and contemptuous of humanity. but he wasn't Doctor Doom until he donned that armor and took Latveria. I've seen nothing to suggest that it won't be the same way with Kebbell. he'll be an angry super genius with designs on the world who discovers the opportunity to make put those plans into action. it was just as true of the Ultimate version of doom as the 616.

This.

If he was always "Doom" it was only because that was his name. I'd prefer to see character growth, not a static character who was always what he ends up becoming.

 

[The Guard]

Yeah, but UFF didn't help define the Silver Age of comics. UFF didn't have a 50 year run as one of the top comic books going. Few if any kids fidgeted through their Tuesday classes looking forward to getting out and heading straight to the newstand to see if the latest UFF issue was out.

It's not the Silver Age, though. It's 2014. Few kids fidget through their classes looking forward to comics these days.

ULTIMATE FOUR may not be the Fantastic Four you grew up with, but they are still part of the mythology of the characters, and have helped to evolve and define it. It'd be like me complaining that the comics of the 70's don't reflect the Fantastic Four comics I read in the 90's or the 2000's. I don't understand this idea of discounting another version or telling of the mythology because it's not the one you personally grew up with, especially when it comes to a film adaption, which is going to change things up anyway in most cases.

Several ideas from the ULTIMATE comics have influenced the 616 universe just as the 616 universe first influenced the ULTIMATE line.

You just seem to assume that because some of the broader story aspects are ULTIMATE-derived that none of what made the Fantastic Four comics "defining" will be found in the movie or this franchise.

 

[EssayM]

These are all fair points, but I think there are a couple different questions here:

1. Is it possible for this to be a very good movie? Yes. I still think Josh Trank is a talented director and the cast has talent. The budget is low for a superhero film, but it could be a good film that does different things from other superhero films. Jeremy Slater is unknown, so the script could be good or bad.


But that question is not what I, personally, am interested in. There are 100 movies that will be coming out that could be good, but I don't follow them and research them and discuss them on forums. I'll see them when they come out and judge them for what they are.

The much more important question to me is:

2. Will this film capture the elements of the Fantastic Four that made me enjoy the comics as a kid and had me hoping for the past 40 plus years for something that will display those elements in a film format?

With each new bit of information we get I become more skeptical that I'll get what I want. And if I'm not going to get what I want, I'm probably wasting my time checking in here every day.

I started reading and posting on these forums a little over 11 years ago because I thought I might FINALLY, after waiting for most of my life, get an FF film that captured the elements that so intrigued me as a child and spent so much time dancing around in my brain.

The first movie (not counting the Corman effort) was a disappointment. The second movie was a disappointment. When I heard that Trank was directing this one and Stentz and Miller were working on a script, I was at the height of my optimism for this latest effort.

But then the Stentz and Miller script was thrown out and they brought in an unknown to write a new script. Nearly every single bit of news I've heard from that moment until right now has been disappointing (to me from my specific perspective of wanting a film faithful to the FF I grew up with).

It's still possible that there will be some elements of this film that will give me a small taste of what I want. But it seems clear now, based on all the information we now know, that the goals of the film-makers are pretty far off from the things I had hoped I would see.

That's understandable. And yeah, if you're expecting the classic adult-aged FF you grew up with (I'm presuming, from previous posts, that you're old enough to have grown up with the original Lee/Kirby run), then I totally understand why you're expecting to be dissapointed, because Fox has been clear from the beginning that this will be teenage FF with Ultimate influences. So yeah, I get that.

Still...First Class did something similar to what this movie seems to be trying to do (I even remember people reacting to the first few production photos with stuff like "Why are they teengers? Why isn't Cyclops there? This movie is going to be stupid!"). But in that movie, not only was the story engaging on its own, but it was clear who each character was supposed to be; James McAvoy acted like a young Xavier, Fassbender acted like a young Magneto, Jennifer Lawrence like Mystique, etc. They still retained the basic essence of the original characters, so you could tell who was who, and they just feel like a random bunch of young actors.

So I guess the basic question is...Can the currently announced cast pull that off? I personally think they can (from an acting and looks perspective, given their previous work, I think they can embody their respective character's distinct personality traits), but of course, it all depends on how they're written, how Trank directs them, how their scenes are shot and edited, etc. So that's why I'm saying, you can't really get a feel for it until you see them in action.

Unlike that Goosebumps movie they're making, that's clearly going to suck.

 

[Shikamaru]

Well, for the UFF, that is a pretty good description.

I keep seeing that argument pop up, but here's the problem with that: it is entirely based on the idea that UFF is good and/or deserves to be adapted.

UFF was a complete disaster. It was critically panned from the beginning. It had poor sales from the beginning. It's the only one of the main 4 Ultimate titles that was never considered good at any point (generally speaking). The other three titles - Spider-Man, X-Men, Ultimates - were at least off to a decent start, both in reception and in popularity. UFF was just made to capitalize on their popularity and success, and was cancelled less than a decade after.

So for those trying to defend the writer/Fox's actions by sourcing UFF (not saying Kelly is doing that; this is a general question to everyone), what's your point? What are you trying to prove by arguing the film is based on a bad take of the Fantastic Four as opposed to being FF in name only? I mean, is that seriously much better?

 

[Dark Raven]

I keep seeing that argument pop up, but here's the problem with that: it is entirely based on the idea that UFF is good and/or deserves to be adapted.

UFF was a complete disaster. It was critically panned from the beginning. It had poor sales from the beginning. It's the only one of the main 4 Ultimate titles that was never considered good at any point (generally speaking). The other three titles - Spider-Man, X-Men, Ultimates - were at least off to a decent start, both in reception and in popularity. UFF was just made to capitalize on their popularity and success, and was cancelled less than a decade after.

So for those trying to defend the writer/Fox's actions by sourcing UFF (not saying Kelly is doing that; this is a general question to everyone), what's your point? What are you trying to prove by arguing the film is based on a bad take of the Fantastic Four as opposed to being FF in name only? I mean, is that seriously much better?

UFF combined with the worst parts of the first two movies, and hoping that this will produce a success.

 

[The Guard]

Having gotten into it a bit more, I question how much of Ultimate Four people have read...or if the idea that the Ultimate version is bad is just based on them reading the first and particularly the second storylines, where Doom is featured.

 

[EssayM]

I keep seeing that argument pop up, but here's the problem with that: it is entirely based on the idea that UFF is good and/or deserves to be adapted.

UFF was a complete disaster. It was critically panned from the beginning. It had poor sales from the beginning. It's the only one of the main 4 Ultimate titles that was never considered good at any point (generally speaking). The other three titles - Spider-Man, X-Men, Ultimates - were at least off to a decent start, both in reception and in popularity. UFF was just made to capitalize on their popularity and success, and was cancelled less than a decade after.

So for those trying to defend the writer/Fox's actions by sourcing UFF (not saying Kelly is doing that; this is a general question to everyone), what's your point? What are you trying to prove by arguing the film is based on a bad take of the Fantastic Four as opposed to being FF in name only? I mean, is that seriously much better?

Speaking personally, I actually thought parts of UFF were not that bad, particularly the origin, and I do think it (meaning the collection of the first couple issues that I actually read) had enough of a cinematic quality that you could see it as a film.

Speaking pragmatically....I have no idea, but Fox clearly thinks its worth adapting (though Kinberg did say they were drawing from all over as well), so either Fox is stupid (which is entirely possible) or they saw something in it that comic book readers didn't.

Also, just curious: Are there any stories in the 616 canon that show the FF when they were younger, like in college or thereabouts? Maybe a flashback sequence or something?

 

[Zarex]

Speaking personally, I actually thought parts of UFF were not that bad, particularly the origin, and I do think it (meaning the collection of the first couple issues that I actually read) had enough of a cinematic quality that you could see it as a film.

Speaking pragmatically....I have no idea, but Fox clearly thinks its worth adapting (though Kinberg did say they were drawing from all over as well), so either Fox is stupid (which is entirely possible) or they saw something in it that comic book readers didn't.

Also, just curious: Are there any stories in the 616 canon that show the FF when they were younger, like in college or thereabouts? Maybe a flashback sequence or something?

Reed and Ben were college roommates, and their relationship has been depicted often in the comic book pages. A parody of the friendship was presented in the Venture Brothers TV show. You couldn't depict the 616 FF in college because, unlike the Trank version, the classic team were of varying ages.

 

[EssayM]

Reed and Ben were college roommates, and their relationship has been depicted often in the comic book pages. A parody of the friendship was presented in the Venture Brothers TV show. You couldn't depict the 616 FF in college because, unlike the Trank version, the classic team were of varying ages.

Thanks. Yeah, the ages are a little weird, but I'm hoping the acting/writing can overcome that.

Side note: Apparently Mara and Kebbell are the oldest in the cast (both are 31), while Bell is 28 and both Teller and Jordan are 27. Maybe I'm over-analyzing, but it would be interesting (albeit a drastic change from the source) if those ages were somehow incorporated into the film. Like Sue and Johnny would have their usual roles, Ben would be kind of an older brother protecting Reed from bullies, and Reed and Johnny would be bickering like younger siblings....

Wow, I really hope they don't do that! That would be terrible! How did I even think that up??

 

[Spider-Fan]

Having gotten into it a bit more, I question how much of Ultimate Four people have read...or if the idea that the Ultimate version is bad is just based on them reading the first and particularly the second storylines, where Doom is featured.

I read the first 30 issues of Ultimate FF. Also read Ultimates 3 and Ultimatum, of which Doom was featured. Dr. Doom in that book is a horrible character and vastly inferior to the classic version of Doom.

 

[Dark Raven]

I read the first 30 issues of Ultimate FF. Also read Ultimates 3 and Ultimatum, of which Doom was featured. Dr. Doom in that book is a horrible character and vastly inferior to the classic version of Doom.

Ultimate Doom really gets your goat.

 

[Captain Marvel]

It's not the Silver Age, though. It's 2014. Few kids fidget through their classes looking forward to comics these days.

You're missing the point. The classic Fantastic Four have stood the test of time. They've lasted for 50 years because at their most basic there's something about them which appeals to people regardless of their generation.

The Ultimate Fantastic Four, however, have not stood the test of time. Does Marvel even publish the Ultimates universe anymore? It was a flash-in-the-pan which has since faded.

So yeah, if they're going to make a movie, then it should be based off of the version of the Fantastic Four that's endured decades.

 

[metaphysician]

Whether this starts filming, or is canceled in the next few weeks, there is only one outcome for this film:

The rights reverting to Marvel.

Sadly, that's not the case. If it does get filmed, and does get released, even if it bombs, its still Fox' for another 7 years. Fox still isn't going to give it back unless Marvel pays for it.

 

[Ant-manic]

I read the first 30 issues of Ultimate FF. Also read Ultimates 3 and Ultimatum, of which Doom was featured. Dr. Doom in that book is a horrible character and vastly inferior to the classic version of Doom.

except being the mastermind behind one of the biggest events in the Ultimate Universe, right?

 

[Spider-Fan]

except being the mastermind behind one of the biggest events in the Ultimate Universe, right?

With a plan that made no logical sense. You're correct.

The Doom I know would NEVER have been as dumb as he was portrayed in Ultimatum.