Fantastic Four reborn! - - - - - - - Part 16

[jaymes_e06]

Have you ever read a Fantastic Four Comic book? Have you ever seen a picture of Johnny Storm? Those are my reasons for thinking he is wrong for the part.

At this point, I'm not even convinced that you really sincerely think that Jordan is perfect for the part....I believe you are arguing the point for the sake of arguing the point. I mean hell, Jack Nicholson is a fantastic actor known for playing brash cocky smartaleck characters....why not put him in the part if looking nothing like how a character has looked for 50 years is so important to you.

In any case....I will occasionally discuss this with other posters, but I see no reason for us to talk anymore.

Thank you C. Lee! Finally we can agree on something.

 

[The Question]

Have you ever read a Fantastic Four Comic book? Have you ever seen a picture of Johnny Storm? Those are my reasons for thinking he is wrong for the part.

At this point, I'm not even convinced that you really sincerely think that Jordan is perfect for the part....I believe you are arguing the point for the sake of arguing the point. I mean hell, Jack Nicholson is a fantastic actor known for playing brash cocky smartaleck characters....why not put him in the part if looking nothing like how a character has looked for 50 years is so important to you.

In any case....I will occasionally discuss this with other posters, but I see no reason for us to talk anymore.

That is simply not true. I don't know how to prove it isn't, but I don't say anything that I don't honestly believe.

Jack Nicholsen is different because he's in his 70s. That would necessitate playing the character very differently.

Michael B. Jordan is a young guy. He looks different from how the character is usually drawn, but that would have no impact on how he plays the part.

I don't think it matters that he looks different if he is capable of embodying the character in his performance. It's not important to me that he looks different, it just isn't important to me that he does.


And to answer your question, yes, I have read a fantastic four comic book. I've read hundreds of them.

 

[C. Lee]

Thank you C. Lee! Finally we can agree on something.

It had to happen eventually t:

 

[Dr Tactics]

That is simply not true. I don't know how to prove it isn't, but I don't say anything that I don't honestly believe.

Jack Nicholsen is different because he's in his 70s. That would necessitate playing the character very differently.

Michael B. Jordan is a young guy. He looks different from how the character is usually drawn, but that would have no impact on how he plays the part.

I don't think it matters that he looks different if he is capable of embodying the character in his performance. It's not important to me that he looks different, it just isn't important to me that he does.


And to answer your question, yes, I have read a fantastic four comic book. I've read hundreds of them.

LOL!!! You got to be the best Spin Dr ever but as always you don't get it. And whats funnier is you don't get the majority here and you keep that in the chamber everytime sombody makes sense. So like I said a while a go, there will be plenty of seats in the empty theater you'll be attending.. So streach out and enjoy because obviously You're "Gonna see it anyway"

 

[Endeavor]

It's silly because there's no reason to think he won't do a good job playing Johnny Storm.

ANY good actor can do a good job at playing Johnny Storm, that doesn't mean they're all the right fit for the role.

Why not cast Steve Buscemi as Human Torch? Robert Deniro? Cloe Grace Moretz?

 

[TeeKay]

Have you ever read a Fantastic Four Comic book? Have you ever seen a picture of Johnny Storm? Those are my reasons for thinking he is wrong for the part.

At this point, I'm not even convinced that you really sincerely think that Jordan is perfect for the part....I believe you are arguing the point for the sake of arguing the point. I mean hell, Jack Nicholson is a fantastic actor known for playing brash cocky smartaleck characters....why not put him in the part if looking nothing like how a character has looked for 50 years is so important to you.

In any case....I will occasionally discuss this with other posters, but I see no reason for us to talk anymore.

 

[cronosred]

That is simply not true. I don't know how to prove it isn't, but I don't say anything that I don't honestly believe.

Jack Nicholsen is different because he's in his 70s. That would necessitate playing the character very differently.

Michael B. Jordan is a young guy. He looks different from how the character is usually drawn, but that would have no impact on how he plays the part.

I don't think it matters that he looks different if he is capable of embodying the character in his performance. It's not important to me that he looks different, it just isn't important to me that he does.


And to answer your question, yes, I have read a fantastic four comic book. I've read hundreds of them.

If you can deviate from one aspect of a character why not another. Wouldn't you be interested in that new fresh take?

 

[Endeavor]

Jack Nicholsen is different because he's in his 70s. That would necessitate playing the character very differently.

Haven't you defended the Michael Douglas casting as Hank Pym?
Why is age not an issue with Ant-Man but it is an issue with Human Torch?

 

[The Question]

LOL!!! You got to be the best Spin Dr ever but as always you don't get it. And whats funnier is you don't get the majority here and you keep that in the chamber everytime sombody makes sense. So like I said a while a go, there will be plenty of seats in the empty theater you'll be attending.. So streach out and enjoy because obviously You're "Gonna see it anyway"

I'm not spinning anything. I honestly don't think it matters that Jordan looks different and that he's a perfect choice for the part.

ANY good actor can do a good job at playing Johnny Storm, that doesn't mean they're all the right fit for the role.

Why not cast Steve Buscemi as Human Torch? Robert Deniro? Cloe Grace Moretz?

1: That's not true. Not any good actor could do a good hop at playing Johnny Storm. Not everyone has the skills to play every type of character.

2: With Buscemi and Deniro, the age is all wrong, especially compared with the rest of the cast. As for Mortez, I don't know anything about her as an actor, but a female Human Torch is something I'm actually open to.

If you can deviate from one aspect of a character why not another. Wouldn't you be interested in that new fresh take?

You can deviate from any aspect of the character if you want to. But making him older wouldn't make a lot of sense in the context of this particular narrative. What works and what doesn't is situational. Sure, it could work and maybe be interesting in theory, but it really doesn't make sense from what it sounds like they're going for.

Also, making the youngest member of the group 50+ years older than the rest of the group changes how the character must be played and portrayed. Changing his race does not. The two aren't really comparable.

Haven't you defended the Michael Douglas casting as Hank Pym?
Why is age not an issue with Ant-Man but it is an issue with Human Torch?

1: The Ant-Man film is focusing on the legacy aspect of Ant-Man. Casting Hank Pym as a generation or two older than Scott Lang makes perfect sense and supports the narrative in that context. That's not a factor here.

2: Hank Pym is not defined by his age. Johnny Storm kind of is. He's the younger, less mature member of the team who rushes into situations and ****s up a lot. Making him older than the rest of the team would upend that aspect of his characterization, whereas making Hank Pym older doesn't do that.

 

[Dark Raven]

I have a feeling The Question wouldn't care if the title "The Fantastic Four" were simply slapped over a film like "The Shawshank Redemption", as long as it's a good movie. In that case, why not just rename "Citizen Kane" to "The Fantastic Four" and be done? That's our FF movie right there, and a good movie which is highly regarded by all the critics no doubt.

 

[jaymes_e06]

If you can deviate from one aspect of a character why not another. Wouldn't you be interested in that new fresh take?

No no noo... race is the only thing that you can deviate from the source material. Everyone knows this.

 

[The Question]

I have a feeling The Question wouldn't care if the title "The Fantastic Four" were simply slapped over a film like "The Shawshank Redemption", as long as it's a good movie. In that case, why not just rename "Citizen Kane" to "The Fantastic Four" and be done? That's our FF movie right there, and a good movie which is highly regarded by all the critics no doubt.

I would care. That would be silly. That's an extreme and highly unlikely scenario.

I'd still probably enjoy the movie, though. Shawshank Redemption is great.

 

[Zarex]

Haven't you defended the Michael Douglas casting as Hank Pym?
Why is age not an issue with Ant-Man but it is an issue with Human Torch?

And Michael Jordan's age IS a problem -in fact, it is a much bigger problem then his racial makeup. Having Ben, Johnny and Reed all be approximately the same age renders the relationships between the three unrecognizable from both the 616 and Ultimate versions.

Physical appearance doesn't matter for characters that have appeared in a VISUAL print medium for over half a century, along with animation and live action. Don't let the apologists convince you otherwise.

 

[cronosred]

You can deviate from any aspect of the character if you want to. But making him older wouldn't make a lot of sense in the context of this particular narrative. What works and what doesn't is situational. Sure, it could work and maybe be interesting in theory, but it really doesn't make sense from what it sounds like they're going for.

Also, making the youngest member of the group 50+ years older than the rest of the group changes how the character must be played and portrayed. Changing his race does not. The two aren't really comparable.

Make him Sue's father, if they can make the Storms adopted it wouldn't be much more of a stretch to make them father and daughter. Can you imagine being in a superhero team with you father-in-law? It practically writes itself.

 

[The Question]

And Michael Jordan's age IS a problem -in fact, it is a much bigger problem then his racial makeup. Having Ben, Johnny and Reed all be approximately the same age renders the relationships between the three unrecognizable from both the 616 and Ultimate versions.

I'm not so sure about that. Ben and Johnny can easily still have the same brotherly dynamic, and I can imagine a group of characters where the most intelligent and mature one is the "team dad" even if in reality he's only a couple of years older.

Physical appearance doesn't matter for characters that have appeared in a VISUAL print medium for over half a century, along with animation and live action. Don't let the apologists convince you otherwise.

I'm assuming you meant "does."

I have to ask: Why? How does it diminish the character if he looks different in an adaptation? So the character originally comes from a visual medium where he looked a certain way. What harm does altering his appearance in the adaptation cause? It's not like we're changing some kind of iconic symbolism here. We're not taking away Batman's cape and cowl or Indian Jones' hat. We're taking a white character who is in no way defined by his whiteness and casting a black actor in a film. What's the harm?

Make him Sue's father, if they can make the Storms adopted it wouldn't be much more of a stretch to make them father and daughter. Can you imagine being in a superhero team with you father-in-law? It practically writes itself.

Going from siblings to father and daughter is significantly more of a stretch than going from siblings to adopted siblings. It really clearly is.

 

[Nokio]

Is Jordan not the youngest. I think he may be the same age as Teller thought.

 

[RAE072]

He's the younger, less mature member of the team.

Michael B Jordan is the same age as Miles Teller.

 

[Endeavor]

Make him Sue's father, if they can make the Storms adopted it wouldn't be much more of a stretch to make them father and daughter. Can you imagine being in a superhero team with you father-in-law? It practically writes itself.

Thank you!
We're taking liberties with the source material right?
Why is it okay to change race and blood relations but not the age dynamics?
Why can't Johnny be the older brother that never matured and Sue the much younger sister that has to pick up his slack? hey, that's a fresh new take on the characters!!!
Saying one thing is okay because film is a different medium and artists should be allowed to take liberties, while at the same time saying other changes aren't okay because they don't fit "the story" (a story which can be anything you want once you start deviating from the source material) well that's just trying to have your cake and eat it too. You can't play both sides.

 

[The Question]

Michael B Jordan is the same age as Miles Teller.

And he can easily play a couple of years younger.

 

[RAE072]

And he can easily play a couple of years younger.

...than Miles Teller?

Miles Teller looks 17 years old.

EDIT: Oh. Look at this. They were both in this dumb movie:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800246/?ref_=nm_knf_t4

Huh. And wasn't Jordan cast before any of them? Oh, he was.

Huh. Imagine that.

 

[The Question]

Thank you!
We're taking liberties with the source material right?
Why is it okay to change race and blood relations but not the age dynamics?

1: It's not a matter of okay, it's a matter of what works for the narrative in this instance.

2: Because changing the age dynamics changes the personalities and relationships of the characters, while changing race and blood relations does not. They aren't comparable.

Why can't Johnny be the older brother that never matured and Sue the much younger sister that has to pick up his slack? hey, that's a fresh new take on the characters!!!

That… would actually be interesting. I'd be totally cool with that.

Saying one thing is okay because film is a different medium and artists should be allowed to take liberties, while at the same time saying other changes aren't okay because they don't fit "the story" (a story which can be anything you want once you start deviating from the source material) well that's just trying to have your cake and eat it too. You can't play both sides.

I'm not playing both sides. Not all changes are equal. Not all changes fundamentally alter the way the character has to be portrayed.

Listen, it's not like I don't have limits. I would not, in fact, consider a film that was called the Fantastic Four but was just The Shawshank Redemption to be a good FF adaptation (although I'd still consider it to be a good film). But my primary concern, essentially my only concern, is the spirit of the thing. Is what this story and these characters are about. Taking Johnny Storm, a character who's age in part defines him, and making him 70 would change some of what he's about. Now, I will say, maybe it would be good if it was well executed, and if it was I'd be totally open to it. But it's not my first instinct. But in the end, Johnny Storm is not defined by being white. Casting a black actor does not fundamentally change what he's about.

To me, wether or not a change from the source material is good depends entirely on wether or not retains the spirit of the character, and how well it furthers the goals of the film. I can't speak to the later, but casting a black man as Johnny Storm does not effect the spirit of the character one way or another.

 

[cronosred]

Going from siblings to father and daughter is significantly more of a stretch than going from siblings to adopted siblings. It really clearly is.

They would still be family. Imagine a hot-headed aging playboy who's trying to reconnect with his daughter while dealing with being on a superhero team with her boyfriend/husband he doesn't really care for. I mean why should the studio have to rely so heavily on the source material?

 

[The Question]

They would still be family. Imagine a hot-headed aging playboy who's trying to reconnect with his daughter while dealing with being on a superhero team with her boyfriend/husband he doesn't really care for. I mean why should the studio have to rely so heavily on the source material?

You know it's a much bigger change. You know it. Adopted siblings are still siblings. The dynamic is completely different. Don't be facetious.

 

[cronosred]

You know it's a much bigger change. You know it. Adopted siblings are still siblings. The dynamic is completely different. Don't be facetious.

I'm not reading how it wouldn't work.

 

[The Question]

I'm not reading how it wouldn't work.

It would work fine. It's a fine dynamic for a film. Never said it wouldn't work.

But it fundamentally changes the dynamic in a way that making them adopted siblings does not. It is not comparable.