Fant4stic Josh Trank Thread

[Gabe99]

The opening of FF #1 does have a creepy edge to it. Reed is a shadowy, mysterious figure, and when we first see Ben, he makes a frightening impression.

I wouldn't use 'dark' in the way it has become cliche for these films - brooding, moping, 'woe is me' and everything sucks, but I think a certain air of mystery is very appropriate for the characters, the science-fiction and the mood Stan and Jack were clearly trying to capture at points.

A lot of the depth and experimentation that Stan and Jack were doing can get lost because of the styles of the times and short deadlines they had towork within, but there are a lot of interesting elements there.

The right creative minds could create some really cool things by understanding and updating the key elements.

If you think about the scene in the first film of Ben transforming, that could have been a wonderfully intense moment - in the hands of a better director.

The pilot episode of The Incredible Hulk did a great job of showing how frightening that kind of metamorphosis can be.

 

[mclay18]

I don't believe the Stentz and Miller credits on IMDB for this film. Keep in mind IMDB is as easily edited like Wikipedia too.

The only writers we know (so far) have been Michael Green, Jeremy Slater, and now Seth Grahame-Smith doing a polish. Those are the only ones that have been officially on board writing.

 

[Kelly]

I don't believe the Stentz and Miller credits on IMDB for this film. Keep in mind IMDB is as easily edited like Wikipedia too.

The only writers we know (so far) have been Michael Green, Jeremy Slater, and now Seth Grahame-Smith doing a polish. Those are the only ones that have been officially on board writing.

You can send changes to IMDB, but they are checked, and then put on....it is not like Wiki where you can simply go on and edit without a check.

On IMDB you have to fill out a form with your content, send it in, and then it is checked and posted if found to be correct information.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I don't believe the Stentz and Miller credits on IMDB for this film. Keep in mind IMDB is as easily edited like Wikipedia too.

The only writers we know (so far) have been Michael Green, Jeremy Slater, and now Seth Grahame-Smith doing a polish. Those are the only ones that have been officially on board writing.

Stentz and Miller were the first names officially announced:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/comic-con-fox-sets-fantastic-four-and-daredevil-reboots-and-puts-joe-cornish-on-rust-loses-david-slade-on-daredevil-redo/

I'm sure there have been a number of re-writes and revisions, but I haven't seen anything to indicate the script they had apparently done had been completely scrapped. I would expect that the other writers were working with a foundation created by Stentz and Miller.

 

[Kelly]

Stentz and Miller were the first names officially announced:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/com...-on-rust-loses-david-slade-on-daredevil-redo/

Im sure there have been a number of re-writes and revisions, but I haven't seen anything to indicate the script they had apparently done had been completely scrapped. I would expect that the other writers were working with a foundation created by Stentz and Miller.

I don't know though....the France script was totally done, and they used absolutely nothing from it for the Frost script...

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I don't know though....the France script was totally done, and they used absolutely nothing from it for the Frost script...

True, and by the time this film comes out, it's possible none of the current names will be on the final credits.

. . . but what do we have better to do over the next two years other than speculate wildly over tiny bits of information.

 

[mclay18]

Stentz and Miller were the first names officially announced:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/comic-con-fox-sets-fantastic-four-and-daredevil-reboots-and-puts-joe-cornish-on-rust-loses-david-slade-on-daredevil-redo/

I thought Stentz & Miller were writing Daredevil, when I read that article last summer. I read it wrong.

 

[Kelly]

True, and by the time this film comes out, it's possible none of the current names will be on the final credits.

. . . but what do we have better to do over the next two years other than speculate wildly over tiny bits of information.

Yeah....Unfortunately for me....I missed a lot of the speculation the first time around. Now, I'm in it from the start....

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Yeah....Unfortunately for me....I missed a lot of the speculation the first time around. Now, I'm in it from the start....

I'm honestly uncertain if you're saying it's unfortunate that you missed it the first time or it's unfortunate you're caught up in it now.

 

[Kelly]

I'm honestly uncertain if you're saying it's unfortunate that you missed it the first time or it's unfortunate you're caught up in it now.

I think that's what I meant......

 

[Bert]

Watched Chronicle recently, its easily one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I mean, unless it was Trank's goal intentionally to make the viewer motion sick while watching his movie. The runtime was short, but it didn't feel like it. Sorry, FF but I'll be waiting til DVD for sure...

Yes I get it, found footage, maybe there's a reason why very few movies are shot in this style, its irritating.

 

[psylockolussus]

Chronicle was awesome!

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Watched Chronicle recently, its easily one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I mean, unless it was Trank's goal intentionally to make the viewer motion sick while watching his movie. The runtime was short, but it didn't feel like it. Sorry, FF but I'll be waiting til DVD for sure...

Yes I get it, found footage, maybe there's a reason why very few movies are shot in this style, its irritating.

So the only reason you state for not liking Chronicle is the camera work, but we can be sure the same technique won't be used for FF.

Why do you assume FF will be bad based on that one detail?

There are plenty of director's whose work I love even though they have made choices I don't like. I would rather see a director do something daring that I don't like than see him or her take no chances.

 

[bubbadoom]

The opening of FF #1 does have a creepy edge to it. Reed is a shadowy, mysterious figure, and when we first see Ben, he makes a frightening impression.

I wouldn't use 'dark' in the way it has become cliche for these films - brooding, moping, 'woe is me' and everything sucks, but I think a certain air of mystery is very appropriate for the characters, the science-fiction and the mood Stan and Jack were clearly trying to capture at points.

A lot of the depth and experimentation that Stan and Jack were doing can get lost because of the styles of the times and short deadlines they had towork within, but there are a lot of interesting elements there.

The right creative minds could create some really cool things by understanding and updating the key elements.

If you think about the scene in the first film of Ben transforming, that could have been a wonderfully intense moment - in the hands of a better director.

We must remember in the first two issues of the FF they were fugitives, hiding from the law, not too different than the Hulk. It was not until #3 that they got their celebrity status....maybe it was the move to New York...

 

[Bert]

So the only reason you state for not liking Chronicle is the camera work, but we can be sure the same technique won't be used for FF.

Why do you assume FF will be bad based on that one detail?

There are plenty of director's whose work I love even though they have made choices I don't like. I would rather see a director do something daring that I don't like than see him or her take no chances.

It wasn't a detail... People complain about shakycam, this was chock full of the shakiest cam I've ever seen. Its not fun to think you're going to watch a movie and half the movie is filmed with a guy holding a camcorder. It sucks! He can't help but remind you its a camcorder by waving it around or taking off running down the hall with it... awful.

 

[psylockolussus]

And as if "cinematography" is the only thing that makes a film good.

It would be silly of you to think the reboot of FF will have the same camera-work.

 

[Bert]

Cinematography isn't the only thing that makes a film good... but when its THAT bad... it pretty much ruins the whole movie.

 

[fangz]

I disagree entirely. I mean at first, I was really conscious of it, but as the movie progressed, I think it only stuck out a couple times once I'd adjusted. A big part of it is how compelling an individual viewer finds the story and characters to be. I immediately really liked the whole dynamic between the 3 guys and took to the movie instantly. It's really a great film, well written, and well acted.

When I heard he'd gotten the job, I immediately thought of the last scene, the standoff at the hospital, and just thought, 'yes! I wanna see this guy direct the real Victor Von Doom'.

anyways, I believe you when you say you hated the camerawork, but I'm betting that you probably didn't like the movie besides the camerawork.

I'm sure there's people, also, who that kind of camerawork has a more visceral effect on than others. Maybe physically, it bugs you more than I could imagine, no matter how much you otherwise would've liked the movie, maybe even too.

Inception had that effect on me, I won't go into why here, but I had to leave the theater at about the 3/4 mark, it was annoying and irritating me so bad. It turned into something resembling nausea, but like if nausea came from headaches or depression. And I've talked to other people who disliked the movie too, but none that actually had a reaction of almost physical disgust like I did. They think I'm exaggerrating, but it really was like that.
I mean the movie couldn't have been that bad, you know? It was something else I was bringing to the table that day.

 

[Bert]

I disagree entirely. I mean at first, I was really conscious of it, but as the movie progressed, I think it only stuck out a couple times once I'd adjusted. A big part of it is how compelling an individual viewer finds the story and characters to be. I immediately really liked the whole dynamic between the 3 guys and took to the movie instantly. It's really a great film, well written, and well acted.

When I heard he'd gotten the job, I immediately thought of the last scene, the standoff at the hospital, and just thought, 'yes! I wanna see this guy direct the real Victor Von Doom'.

anyways, I believe you when you say you hated the camerawork, but I'm betting that you probably didn't like the movie besides the camerawork.

I'm sure there's people, also, who that kind of camerawork has a more visceral effect on than others. Maybe physically, it bugs you more than I could imagine, no matter how much you otherwise would've liked the movie, maybe even too.

Inception had that effect on me, I won't go into why here, but I had to leave the theater at about the 3/4 mark, it was annoying and irritating me so bad. It turned into something resembling nausea, but like if nausea came from headaches or depression. And I've talked to other people who disliked the movie too, but none that actually had a reaction of almost physical disgust like I did. They think I'm exaggerrating, but it really was like that.
I mean the movie couldn't have been that bad, you know? It was something else I was bringing to the table that day.

Thanks man, you articulated it better than I had.

 

[Serpico Jones]

I have a feeling Josh Trank won't end up directing this movie. I think the studio will go with a veteran because this is a big tentpole for Fox and I don't see them trusting a young guy like Trank.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

I think he's pretty much locked down for FF.

 

[Serpico Jones]

I think he's pretty much locked down for FF.

Things change. Matthew Vaughn was booted off of X-Men and I think Trank will get the boot too.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Things change. Matthew Vaughn was booted off of X-Men and I think Trank will get the boot too.

Vaughn wasn't booted off of X-Men.

 

[Kelly]

I don't believe the Stentz and Miller credits on IMDB for this film. Keep in mind IMDB is as easily edited like Wikipedia too.

The only writers we know (so far) have been Michael Green, Jeremy Slater, and now Seth Grahame-Smith doing a polish. Those are the only ones that have been officially on board writing.

On IMDB, I believe the only thing the normal poster can edit is in the Synopsis.

 

[Retroman]

Just came across this article from the print edition of Rolling Stone Magazine. It's from 2012 (i think) and offers a little insight into who Trank is and why he wants to be original.

BIG PRODIGY
JOSH TRANK


Director josh trank was only 27 when his hit Chronicle came out in February, and he still looks, acts and lives like a scrappy film-school grad on the make. He shares a modest L.A. apartment in still-gentrifying Echo Park with his fiancee, Nikki, who works in customer service, and two roommates. On a recent sunny afternoon, he’s eating takeout enchiladas from down the street and recalling his itinerant L.A. childhood. Josh is the son of documentary filmmaker Richard Trank (who won an Oscar in 1997 for The Long Way Home), and his mom quit her job as a marketing illustrator to become a Beverly Hills preschool teacher so her children could attend the public schools there. That gave Trank access to the Beverly Hills High School TV station, and he spent four years making hundreds of TV shows. “I was the kid who was not showering, just at the TV station,” he remembers.

In 2007, Trank made a 90-second short, Stabbing at Leia’s 22nd Birthday, about a light-saber duel at a drunken college party. “We spent literally $80 on it,” Trank says. “I drew every frame of the effects by hand.” It amassed more than 5 million views online, and Trank got a job with Spike TV, and then work on 2009’s critically revered Patton Oswalt film Big Fan as, he says, “editor, producer, second-unit director and poster designer.”

He got the idea for Chronicle,about a bunch of high school friends who get supernatural powers, years ago, but hesitated, fearing there was a glut of fake documentaries. He wound up making Chronicle for $15 million, and in two months, it grossed $119 million worldwide. Now he has his choice of three different comic-book adaptations for his follow-up: a reboot of Fantastic Four; The Red Star, a fantasy-sci movie about an alternative-universe USSR; and Venom, based on the Spider-Man supervillain.

His greatest asset may be his encyclopedic knowledge of movies, which he applied in Chronicle, eliminating anything he felt had already been done. “I still had a couple dozen things I hadn’t quite seen before,” he says. “I didn’t know if they’d work or not, but the whole point of film-making is figuring it out.”
GAVIN EDWARDS

SOURCE (pdf file)

This might explain why FF's plot "won't be based on any history of anything already published".