Fantastic Four reborn! - - - Part 19

[DarthSkywalker]

Who is complaining?

Trank's name has been trashed for over a month. Everything from he's a druggie to he trashed a house and nobody responded. Yet Vaughn says he thinks the movie is good and the next day "it's a mess!"??

Even the TMNT alien stuff got out.

How is.."it looks like another movie people liked.." equal to it's a mess?

I am not sure what your point is.

 

[Zarex]

Who is complaining?

Trank's name has been trashed for over a month. Everything from he's a druggie to he trashed a house and nobody responded. Yet Vaughn says he thinks the movie is good and the next day "it's a mess!"??

Even the TMNT alien stuff got out.

How is.."it looks like another movie people liked.." equal to it's a mess?

Because a proper FF film should look nothing like Chronicle. It's like Singer telling us that if you loved Saw you'll like X Men: Apocalypse.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Because a proper FF film should look nothing like Chronicle. It's like Singer telling us that if you loved Saw you'll like X Men: Apocalypse.

What is a "proper" FF film? See, I am cool with not liking the Chronicle style, but there is no such thing as a "proper" way to make any film. Probably using your logic the two films they made a decade ago were in the "proper" style, and they were awful imo.

 

[Zarex]

What is a "proper" FF film? See, I am cool with not liking the Chronicle style, but there is no such thing as a "proper" way to make any film. Probably using your logic the two films they made a decade ago were in the "proper" style, and they were awful imo.

If you strip the "Fantastic" away from the team, you're probably on the wrong track.

And the prior films failed because they were terrible, not because they were light in tone and family friendly. Don't make the same mistake FOX did.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I am not sure what your point is.

I'm saying it's one thing to say the third act is disappointing ala Bond Spectre.

Saying something is a mess cause it looks like Chronicle is weird.

Movies can be anything. Abram's Star Trek didn't look like Star Trek. That doesn't mean it was a mess or bad.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Because a proper FF film should look nothing like Chronicle. It's like Singer telling us that if you loved Saw you'll like X Men: Apocalypse.

A proper X-men film should be set in the 1960s? Nah, but it can be.

Found Footage is just a style of film-making. Snyder aped Malick's style for MOS and it looked different. It wasn't "improper."



No one would say Battleship looks like Transformers therefore it's good. They're both terrible for different reasons.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

If you strip the "Fantastic" away from the team, you're probably on the wrong track.

And the prior films failed because they were terrible, not because they were light in tone and family friendly. Don't make the same mistake FOX did.

But that has nothing to do with how the film is shot. Cloverfield was a "proper" monster film, and it was shot in the same manner.

And what mistake am I making? The entire point is there is no style of film making that dictates what makes a good film. You are the one limiting the scope based on a personal preference for style.

The problem here won't be the style, it will be the tone, writing, etc. The same for any other bad film ever made, and that includes the first 3 FF films.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I'm saying it's one thing to say the third act is disappointing ala Bond Spectre.

Saying something is a mess cause it looks like Chronicle is weird.

Movies can be anything. Abram's Star Trek didn't look like Star Trek. That doesn't mean it was a mess or bad.

I agree with that principle. Though I don't agree with Abram's Star Trek not looking like Star Trek, I-bridge aside.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I agree with that principle. Though I don't agree with Abram's Star Trek not looking like Star Trek, I-bridge aside.

Trek is a lot slower paced than Abrams younger crew. How many times did we see them running down corridors? LOL.

Lens flares. LOL

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Trek is a lot slower paced than Abrams younger crew. How many times did we see them running down corridors? LOL.

Lens flares. LOL

Pace is one thing, look is another. You are actually doing what you say Zarex of doing. Confounding two things.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Pace is one thing, look is another. You are actually doing what you accused Zarex of doing.

No where near. Did I say Abrams Trek was bad because it looked visually different from the older stuff?

No. I acknowledged it's something different and took it on it's own merits. The same way I took DS9 on a space station instead of on a vessel on it's own merits. Not for not lining up with traditional images of Trek.

Same with Doctor Who being younger and more flirty with his companion.


Saying a movie can't be in a certain style is different from noticing changes in approach to the material.

 

[Eddie]

Who is complaining?

Trank's name has been trashed for over a month. Everything from he's a druggie to he trashed a house and nobody responded. Yet Vaughn says he thinks the movie is good and the next day "it's a mess!"??

Even the TMNT alien stuff got out.

How is.."it looks like another movie people liked.." equal to it's a mess?

I think what you're not getting is that according to a report, Fox executives specifically called this film a mess. Fox is calling it a mess. Not just the fans. They didn't just say it looked like Chronicle. They allegedly think it's a mess that needs millions spent in reshooting much of the third act to salvage it.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I think what you're not getting is that according to a report, Fox executives specifically called this film a mess. Fox is calling it a mess. Not just the fans. They didn't just say it looked like Chronicle. They allegedly think it's a mess that needs millions spent in reshooting much of the third act to salvage it.

Before the Sony leak I would have agreed. Now I know that "Fox execs" could mean anything. It isn't one person or a monolith. Three execs could feel one way and the one could feel another way.

The same way one exec may want Angelina Jolie to front Cleopatra yet another doesn't and have nothing to do with what the actual movie needs.

Chronicle 2.0 isn't going to make 300 million dollars especially with the FF name attached.

Or maybe it will .....I don't know.

It definitely isn't the safer bet like making it look the standard Avengers or Tranformers or Oz the Great and Powerful approach.


If Fox was looking for Tranks replacement before shooting then maybe he never had the full-backing of "all Fox execs" in the first place.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No where near. Did I say Abrams Trek was bad because it looked visually different from the older stuff?

No. I acknowledged it's something different and took it on it's own merits. The same way I took DS9 on a space station instead of on a vessel on it's own merits. Not for not lining up with traditional images of Trek.

Same with Doctor Who being younger and more flirty with his companion.


Saying a movie can't be in a certain style is different from noticing changes in approach to the material.

That isn't the point. You are taking two different things, and using them to prove something. Like saying an Apple doesn't look like another apple by taste. What does the pace and running down halls have to do with it looking like old Trek?

See what I mean?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think what you're not getting is that according to a report, Fox executives specifically called this film a mess. Fox is calling it a mess. Not just the fans. They didn't just say it looked like Chronicle. They allegedly think it's a mess that needs millions spent in reshooting much of the third act to salvage it.

I am more then willingly to believe these reports, but I do think it is funny they wanted to do the movie on the cheap, and now need millions in reshoots and they are willing to pay. That doesn't seem quite right.

 

[Eddie]

They may not have felt the film was releasable. They've gotta release the thing, as they've made it clear they have difficulty sharing their toys with Marvel. Marvel won't give them a redo. Fox has to make this version work, at least enough so that it can release.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They may not have felt the film was releasable. They've gotta release the thing, as they've made it clear they have difficulty sharing their toys with Marvel. Marvel won't give them a redo. Fox has to make this version work, at least enough so that it can release.

All films are releasable, no matter how bad. And they don't need a redo from Marvel. They honestly don't need anything from Marvel.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

That isn't the point. You are taking two different things, and using them to prove something. Like saying an Apple doesn't look like another apple by taste. What does the pace and running down halls have to do with it looking like old Trek?

See what I mean?

It's apart of keeping the more frantic pacing.

I watched a lot of old Trek and used to love the talking in the lift scenes. I never noticed until RedLetterMedia reviewed Abrams Trek that he cut out those long lift scenes. Spock enters the lift in one part of the ship then arrives at the bridge a few seconds later.

The characters ran around the ship from like it was four floors instead of how the old series acknowledged that it takes a while to get from parts of the ship.

It was subtle stuff like that I never noticed cause I was just watching the movie as it is.


None of this is here or there. I hope we agree that saying a movie can't be a certain style is silly.

 

[Flint Marko]

Who is complaining?

Trank's name has been trashed for over a month. Everything from he's a druggie to he trashed a house and nobody responded. Yet Vaughn says he thinks the movie is good and the next day "it's a mess!"??

Even the TMNT alien stuff got out.

How is.."it looks like another movie people liked.." equal to it's a mess?

"If you like Sound of Music, you're gonna love Deadpool!"
Also, note how everyone who has spoken out about the film gives it such muted praise. Saying "it's good" and then in the same breath, another movie is deemed as "fantastic" - that's funny, the film you were just referring to has the word "fantastic" in the title (maybe? we don't really know) yet you, the person trying to hype people up and dispel rumors, called it "good"? Pretty weak.

I am more then willingly to believe these reports, but I do think it is funny they wanted to do the movie on the cheap, and now need millions in reshoots and they are willing to pay. That doesn't seem quite right.

They didn't do it right the first time, so they're doing it again and spending a lot more money and paying people overtime to get it done. Classic.

 

[Zarex]

But that has nothing to do with how the film is shot. Cloverfield was a "proper" monster film, and it was shot in the same manner.

And what mistake am I making? The entire point is there is no style of film making that dictates what makes a good film. You are the one limiting the scope based on a personal preference for style.

The problem here won't be the style, it will be the tone, writing, etc. The same for any other bad film ever made, and that includes the first 3 FF films.

From Vaughn's comments it appears as though we're not just talking about a found footage style, though I would suggest this is a bad choice for depicting Marvel's First Family. We're hearing grim, gritty, lo fi, realistic - everything except "fantastic".

The mistake is blaming the tone and attempts at humor on the failure of the first films. Then deciding a radical reimagination was required to the point that an FF film becomes FFINO.

 

[Serpico Jones]

Simon Kinberg is denying that the film is a mess to Latino Review, he says they're doing 4-5 days worth of pickups and confirmed that the FF trailer is attached to Kingsman.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

"If you like Sound of Music, you're gonna love Deadpool!"
Also, note how everyone who has spoken out about the film gives it such muted praise. Saying "it's good" and then in the same breath, another movie is deemed as "fantastic" - that's funny, the film you were just referring to has the word "fantastic" in the title (maybe? we don't really know) yet you, the person trying to hype people up and dispel rumors, called it "good"? Pretty weak.
.

So if Garfield says the new Spiderman script is "amazing" that makes it so?

I'm not trying to hype anyone up. I'm hype cause I like Trank and am okay with seeing something "good" instead of the mediocre Story FF as the only depiction of the FF.

You can improve on Good.

I won't hold my breath on TMNT 2 becoming the greatest Turtle movie.

 

[Eddie]

Simon Kinberg wrote the film. Why the hell would he admit it's a mess?

All films are releasable, no matter how bad. And they don't need a redo from Marvel. They honestly don't need anything from Marvel.

They could probably use a stack of Fantastic Four comics. They don't seem to have read any.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Simon Kinberg is denying that the film is a mess to Latino Review, he says they're doing 4-5 days worth of pickups and confirmed that the FF trailer is attached to Kingsman.

So it's either 4-5 days, one month, or three months?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They didn't do it right the first time, so they're doing it again and spending a lot more money and paying people overtime to get it done. Classic.