How to combine ult galactus and normal galactus?

[Iceburgeruk]

If they are deadset on using elements of the ultimate galactus then maybe a bit of damage control could keep the best bits of the originla galactus in the film.

For instance, in my opinion a cool way to have it is to have galactus as the gah lak tus bit in space (a swarm of insecty robots) but then once he arrives in new york the lil robots all join together to form a giant human form. It would look a lot like galactus that we know just with more technologicla detail upon the epidermal layer (little fiddly bits and tiny details like for example on a borg cube).

Thats the only way i can personally see the combination working.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Thats not a bad idea,he travels as a fleet and then once on a planet he forms into one being

 

[Vartha]

hmmmm I might be able to live with that, BUT, how are they gonna send Torch into Big G's ship to get the Nullifier?
I think Galactus's ship should remain as is. Like I've said before, in the Trial of Reed Richards, each Alien race saw Galactus in a different way, not all were human looking.
I say keep the Big G as is in the Classic form and go alittle more detail in the Surfer movie.

 

[gerbstat]

 

[Doctor of Doom]

Actually, that is a good idea I can see working- the Gah Lak Tus swarm forming into human formation at the Earth. It is a way to have the same effect without coming across as utterly totally cheesy

 

[celldog]

No. The Kirby / Lee story is a classic. That's like changing Hamlet. Whether younger reader know Kirby's Galactus is irrelevent. You should always pay homage to the classics by introducing the new generation to the "classics". "Ultimate Extinction" was crap anyway. Very anti-climactic".

There's a reason why those stories worked.

 

[Dr.Dude]

The way I could see it working would be that the insect like things would be mechanical devices that the real Galactus feeds through. As in, you have the classic Galactus humanoid sitting in his ship as the insect-like things come out, tunnel their way into the ground across the planet, and feed it all to him that way.

 

[GNR]

Ultimate Galactus is lame.Stick to the classics.

 

[celldog]

Ultimate Galactus is lame.Stick to the classics.

Amen !!

 

[Doctor of Doom]

I have described in detail why I think Ultimate Galactus might be better for movie purposes over in the 'Don't dum it down, damnit!" thread and feel no need to repeat myself, but check out the last page or so of it for my opinion

 

[Fantastic-Boy]

The classic is always better!

 

[celldog]

The Hulk bombed because it tried to re-tell the classic Gamma Bomb explosion origin! It didn't respect the classic tale!! There was no need to change it!!

The tales are classics..........you don't mess with the classics!! They are classic for a reason!!! Introduce the new generation to the old. I appreciate the old stuff.

FF 48-50 are the holy grail of comics!! No one had ever done a story like that!!! Why change it???????

 

[Kelly]

Oh Boy....*sighs* this is gonna be fun....

 

[THOR]

Stay with the classic versions please. No Ultimate anything. Issue 48, 49 and 50 should be the working script for this picture.

 

[Doctor of Doom]

I'm sorry, but i need to continue to disagree. Besides the fact that no-one will EVER buy that.

We need to remember that the best Superhero movies so far have often been the ones that deviated from the originals.

Ask any X-Men fan and they will tell you X-Men is probably the MOST changed from comic to movie IMO, but the X-Men movies are the three best super hero movies (again IMO- though most will at least agree on X2). Spider-Man retold the origin- yes they kept it similar but it is no longer a 'radioactive Spider', he can now create his own webs, the Goblin is very different, etc, etc. And Spider-Man is one of the best film franchises. I can't judge on Batman and Superman myself, having never read their comics. Hulk was NOT bad because it deviated from the comics, it was bad because it was poorly written and had the TOTAL wrong aim: psychologal study etc.

Fantastic Four was not poorly recieved in general because it deviated from the comics, but because it didn't have that good a script and some casting choices were a bit off.

To summarise:

Galactus = Good for Fanboys
Gah Lak Tus = Good for moviegoers = $

The worst part? Even if they gave us proper Galactus and the whole movie was a total utterly faithful adaption of the original coming... fanboys would still whine

 

[Mr. Credible]

If they are deadset on using elements of the ultimate galactus then maybe a bit of damage control could keep the best bits of the originla galactus in the film.

For instance, in my opinion a cool way to have it is to have galactus as the gah lak tus bit in space (a swarm of insecty robots) but then once he arrives in new york the lil robots all join together to form a giant human form. It would look a lot like galactus that we know just with more technologicla detail upon the epidermal layer (little fiddly bits and tiny details like for example on a borg cube).

Thats the only way i can personally see the combination working.

i can dig it.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

If they are deadset on using elements of the ultimate galactus then maybe a bit of damage control could keep the best bits of the originla galactus in the film.

For instance, in my opinion a cool way to have it is to have galactus as the gah lak tus bit in space (a swarm of insecty robots) but then once he arrives in new york the lil robots all join together to form a giant human form. It would look a lot like galactus that we know just with more technologicla detail upon the epidermal layer (little fiddly bits and tiny details like for example on a borg cube).

Thats the only way i can personally see the combination working.

By being near Earth, the unformed spread out mass' gravity would rip things off the face of the Earth. There would be NO way all those things, or half, or even a quarter could be on Earth at a single location. I couldn't even imagine what it would do.

I liked it just fine if he weren't some beastial neanderthal.

 

[HoratioRome]

has it been confirmed that they are using ultmite Craplactus?
If they do I will not go anywhere near this movie.
Someone said it best the Lee/Kirby story is CLASSIC why mess with perfection?

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Because it wasn't really Ultimates friendly. You can't go out on a spree where you try to use some form of pseudo science and much more modern thought into the universe, then decide to use a 200 foot tall conceptual being who eats some unknown energy from living planets.

 

[celldog]

I'm sorry, but i need to continue to disagree. Besides the fact that no-one will EVER buy that.

We need to remember that the best Superhero movies so far have often been the ones that deviated from the originals.

Ask any X-Men fan and they will tell you X-Men is probably the MOST changed from comic to movie IMO, but the X-Men movies are the three best super hero movies (again IMO- though most will at least agree on X2). Spider-Man retold the origin- yes they kept it similar but it is no longer a 'radioactive Spider', he can now create his own webs, the Goblin is very different, etc, etc. And Spider-Man is one of the best film franchises.

Even with all of the changes made in those stories the base was intact. Charles Xavier still ran a school, Cyclops still had eye beams not mental powers. Storm was a weather manipulator not a shape-changer. Spiderman didn't have web shooters. But he was still bitten and got powers. Get me??
This is a total change from what Galactus is. "Ultimate Extinction" was horrible.


I can't judge on Batman and Superman myself, having never read their comics. Hulk was NOT bad because it deviated from the comics, it was bad because it was poorly written and had the TOTAL wrong aim: psychologal study etc.

Hulk was horrible not just because of the origin but you're right, that psycho-babble was very bad.

Fantastic Four was not poorly recieved in general because it deviated from the comics, but because it didn't have that good a script and some casting choices were a bit off.


Just a "bit"??? Doom had a leisure suit and no European accent. He wasn't even a genious like Reed....just a pretty boy millionaire. Ben looked plastic....Reed was wuss.

To summarize:

Galactus = Good for Fanboys
Gah Lak Tus = Good for moviegoers = $


Gah Lak Tus = Ridiculous

The worst part? Even if they gave us proper Galactus and the whole movie was a total utterly faithful adaption of the original coming... fanboys would still whine

Maybe...........let's find out.

 

[Doctor of Doom]

Just a "bit"??? Doom had a leisure suit and no European accent. He wasn't even a genious like Reed....just a pretty boy millionaire. Ben looked plastic....Reed was wuss.

Um... I missing something... besides possibly the accent (and THAT is arguable) that has absoloutely nothing to do what casting... ???

Even with all of the changes made in those stories the base was intact. Charles Xavier still ran a school, Cyclops still had eye beams not mental powers. Storm was a weather manipulator not a shape-changer. Spiderman didn't have web shooters. But he was still bitten and got powers. Get me??
This is a total change from what Galactus is. "Ultimate Extinction" was horrible.

Oh undoubtedly. It was a terrible story arc. But I maintain it was not terrible because of Gah Lak Tus, it was TERRIBLE because it was craply paced and poorly written, but had some good ideas. And yes, I take your point about those films. But still, with Gah Lak Tus, Galactus is still a planet-eater, not a horse jockey or something

Gah Lak Tus = Ridiculous

....Did you honestly just call something ridiculous while making a case to have a giant guy in purple and pink armour with an abysmally tall hat called GALACTUS turn up and start trying to eat the Earth?

Yes, yes, you and I both know Galactus is an IMMENSELY complex character, but what I just described above is what most moviegoers are going to see. Ah to Hell with it, I'll repost why I think Gah Lak Tus is better for the movie:

As the only person in this thread who has actually argued in FAVOUR of Ultimate Gah Lak Tus, I feel compelled to defend my point of view. Firstly let me say this; I would LOVE it if we got Galactus, and I'd LOVE it if he was done well... but I don't think he can be in these circumstances.

I DON'T think they should pick Gah Lak Tus just for the UFF readers
I DON'T agree with what they did with Doom in FF 1
BUT I can understand why they did what they did to Doom
And I can understand why they might want to choose Gah Lak Tus

So here are my arguments on why Gah Lak Tus can work better IN A MOVIE:

1. Spectacle. Let's be totally honest wirh ourselves here- I like Galactus as much as the next guy but what is going to make audiences say 'wow'- seeing an enormous guy in WHATEVER costume... no matter how big... or seeing this colossal armada of creatures through space... being told it is one hundred thousand miles long.... let's face it, for the general audience it's definitely more of a 'wow' factor

2. Tension and Impact. Again, I'm going to use a comparison- through FF2 and yes, into FF3 if necessary, there has to be tension about Galactus' arrival. The audience needs to feel it. Now let's face it, again, putting our own comics knowledge aside, what is going to build tension more- this mass hurtling through space or the aforementioned giant guy? But wait- tension is dependant on what they can DO. One of the (few) parts of the Ultimate Extinction series done well was showing what Gah Lak Tus has done to other planets- when Reed showed that hologram of people going insane with fear, of the virus destroying people... it worked brilliantly.

This, as opposed to a hologram of an enormous guy amidst boiling lava destroying a world.. the latter can work, but the former can work better for a movie audience. The audience really needs to feel that Galactus is a colossal threat. Another idea which would be great but very unlikely because of the light-hearted movie tone is to take from the Ultimate Galactus series the idea of every television channel on earth being taken over and just broadcasting the same message of no escape, etc. Plus it is far more 'realistic' in movie terms to have this threat suck a planet's life force rather than blow it up

3. How to Defeat It- What defeats Galactus? The Ultimate Nullifier? Well, let's face it... I don't see how they can REALLY 'defeat' Galactus without killing him. In the time afforded to the movie, I just don't think it is plausible to explain that Galactus is necessary for the universe, despite the fact that he DESTROYS PLANETS, etc, etc. It doesn't work so well. The Ultimate Extinction way- destroy 20% of it's mass so that it is so badly hurt it seeks easier prey elsewhere etc, works- and then you can tie that in with the Surfer departing to tell other worlds the secret so that they will all be safe from Galactus/Gah Lak Tus. Leave the 'superhero fight' for Doctor Doom.


Well those are my three big arguments for why, IN THE MOVIE, Gah Lak Tus might be a more plausible idea. I feel I should make clear; I THINK they will use a more original-style Galactus, I believe Galactus has the potential to be far better if done correctly, but I am just arguing to the contrary because Gah Lak Tus can work. Plus I like being the underdog in an argument My only real problem with using Gah Lak Tus is that since FF is more 'family friendly' they won't be able to build up Gah Lak Tus as enough of a threat.

Oh yeah, and one last thing; as I said before, Gah Lak Tus IS the easy way out. But the easy way out is sometimes preferable to trying to bring Galactus to the bigscreen and ruining him completely. With people being so unsatisfied with FF1, I don't think I would trust Story and Co to be able to bring Galactus to life properly!

PS: I do in fact like FF1, it was not as bad as everyone said so they did destroy Doom, and I have no problem with Story and Co- I don't think I'd trust ANYONE to bring Galactus to life properly!

 

[November Rain]

If they are deadset on using elements of the ultimate galactus then maybe a bit of damage control could keep the best bits of the originla galactus in the film.

For instance, in my opinion a cool way to have it is to have galactus as the gah lak tus bit in space (a swarm of insecty robots) but then once he arrives in new york the lil robots all join together to form a giant human form. It would look a lot like galactus that we know just with more technologicla detail upon the epidermal layer (little fiddly bits and tiny details like for example on a borg cube).

Thats the only way i can personally see the combination working.

sounds like a matrix rip off to me...

 

[GhostPoet]

If they are deadset on using elements of the ultimate galactus then maybe a bit of damage control could keep the best bits of the originla galactus in the film.

For instance, in my opinion a cool way to have it is to have galactus as the gah lak tus bit in space (a swarm of insecty robots) but then once he arrives in new york the lil robots all join together to form a giant human form. It would look a lot like galactus that we know just with more technologicla detail upon the epidermal layer (little fiddly bits and tiny details like for example on a borg cube).

Thats the only way i can personally see the combination working.

they could make a giant group of robots with pink skirts and human heads with a dorky helmet on.

 

[celldog]

Um... I missing something... besides possibly the accent (and THAT is arguable) that has absoloutely nothing to do what casting... ???

The casting wasn't that hot either.


Oh undoubtedly. It was a terrible story arc. But I maintain it was not terrible because of Gah Lak Tus, it was TERRIBLE because it was craply paced and poorly written, but had some good ideas. And yes, I take your point about those films. But still, with Gah Lak Tus, Galactus is still a planet-eater, not a horse jockey or something

I say that it was horrible because of Gah Lak Tus. Drones??? And we never really got to see him?? He just goes away??? How lame was that?

....Did you honestly just call something ridiculous while making a case to have a giant guy in purple and pink armour with an abysmally tall hat called GALACTUS turn up and start trying to eat the Earth?

Yes I am.

These types of charcters are Space gods. Ridiculous isn't the right adjective. Awesome is better. Majestic. Not unless you're just trying to pad your point of view.


Yes, yes, you and I both know Galactus is an IMMENSELY complex character, but what I just described above is what most moviegoers are going to see. Ah to Hell with it, I'll repost why I think Gah Lak Tus is better for the movie:

Galactus is a classic. A one of a kind creation when he was first unleased by Lee and Kirby. It was Beethoven. You don't change Beethoven.

 

[wobbly]

sounds like a matrix rip off to me...

The fact that the design of the Ultimate Gal-Lak-Tus drones and the concept behind them (an artificial intelligence consuming organic energy to sustain it's technology) is far too reminiscient of the Matrix films is reason enough for me to hope they avoid going down that route. Yeah, it worked fine for the Matrix films, but it's been done, so why invite the criticism of ripping off others when you have in place an alternative superior to that idea anyway?

No, I want them to give us Galactus as a cosmic space god, a terrifying force of nature as old as the universe itself. Sure, they can update the armour, but dont change the fundamental original concept of the character to match it's inferior (and derivative of other sources) ultimate counterpart. This mistake was made with Doom in the first movie, I really really hope they dont make it again.