Old MCU Fantastic Four Discussion Thread

[HBarnill]

Amusing video essay, to say the least.

 

[psylockolussus]

I'd like to see Anne Hathaway or Emily Blunt as Sue Storm.

Also I hope they adapt Mole Man and the Moloids for the films, I don't ee had underground creatures in a MCU/Marvel film ever. Also having someone other than Doom as the film's villain, would be so refreshing.

 

[HBarnill]

With Ben you have to use CG. Practical effects would stile the actor's movements which means that CG would be used for every fight scene anyway. More importantly it would not convey any of the actors' facial emotions, which is important for film. Practical effects are just not as good as CG is with mo-capping when it comes to that. He may be able to be a mix of the two, but he can't be 100% practical it would look clunky and not work.

Well, the fight scenes, sure, but I thought Michael Chiklis did a great job expressing his emotions under all that prosthetic. Then again, he is Michael Chiklis. Say what you will about those films, he was one of the best castings in a CBM ever. The films don't deserve his effort.

 

[psylockolussus]

He was fantastic in the role.

 

[HBarnill]

He was fantastic in the role.

You couldn't help it, huh?

 

[psylockolussus]

The pun was not intended.

 

[Crimz]

Well, the fight scenes, sure, but I thought Michael Chiklis did a great job expressing his emotions under all that prosthetic. Then again, he is Michael Chiklis. Say what you will about those films, he was one of the best castings in a CBM ever. The films don't deserve his effort.

He did great and was perfectly cast, but the prosthetic's did not look like Ben Grimm. They weren't that heavy around the face so that the actor could emote but as a result he looked like himself but with a really bad skin condition.

For this to be translated faithfully:

CGI and mocap are needed, especially for emoting and realistic movement of the sheer bulk of the character. Ben is huge and putting an actor inside the prosthetic suit required to replicate that would result in stiff and slow movements. We also tend to forget how much is conveyed from body language, something else that would be lost from a practical effects Thing.

 

[Iceman]

I’m just fed up with this mentality of CGI for everything. The Thing and Torch can work as practical effects, as proven before. CG for Sue, sure. Mixture of CG with practical effects for Reed, Ok. But CGI is inherently lazy and ruins the magic of cinema when you use it way too much. Only use it when it’s absolutely necessary. Otherwise, practical effects have yet to break, so don’t fix it.

CGI ruined Thanos, Apes and Gollum but thankfully Apocalypse didn't go that route.

 

[HBarnill]

CGI ruined Thanos, Apes and Gollum but thankfully Apocalypse didn't go that route.

I never said abandon CGI entirely.

 

[Iceman]

I never said abandon CGI entirely.

Maybe you're not giving it due credit is what I'm suggesting. Up to you if you agree or not. I don't think anyone is calling for excessive CG in the way that Lucas **a* out for the prequels.

 

[Tymminator]

I don't agree.

I agree with you, I like Blunt. Sue when written right has a sense of strength, and Blunt besides being attractive is very good at inner strength.

 

[Silvermoth]

I definitely don’t want to see the whole every villain wants to marry sue type story

I'm sure nobody will mind that he showed up on "Agents of SHIELD" playing their version of Blizzard.

Nah, they didn’t when alfre Woodard played two different characters. Let’s be honest, the tvverse and the movie verse are quite different. If he had already played a movie character it would probably be different

 

[HBarnill]

Maybe you're not giving it due credit is what I'm suggesting. Up to you if you agree or not. I don't think anyone is calling for excessive CG in the way that Lucas **a* out for the prequels.

The prequels soured me on extensive CGI use but if you can’t do it practically after you tried it or for safety reasons, then use it. Just make sure you get WETA to do it. They’re the best at this.

 

[Iceman]

The prequels soured me on extensive CGI use but if you can’t do it practically after you tried it or for safety reasons, then use it. Just make sure you get WETA to do it. They’re the best at this.

The prequels soured nearly everyone on CG at the time but thankfully Gollum was a saving grace back then. Lucas totally overused it for whole background environments as well as characters and on many unnecessary things. I don’t think anyone wants to see that done now. CG is something that is rapidly advancing and the dynamics of the discussion should change with time rather than forgetting to reflect that. There will also be situations where CG will be superior even when practical is fine but I think this may take more years before people who aren’t really aware of the potential in the best hands will be convinced. The problem, like with 3D, is that we often have bad CG that the best guys wouldn’t consider putting out.

Nearly every 3D film after Avatar failed to utilise or improve on the technical level that Avatar introduced. If we had got that or better in all the big films in the years since, 3D I think would be huge now. And we are judging CG by the many failures like Steppenwolf rather than on its own potential in the best hands. I’m sure the apes in Planet of the Apes could have been done well practically but at some point CG can improve that. Anyway this discussion will become clearer with time (and less Lucas ).

 

[Silvermoth]

I think like everything, cgi can be used well but if it’s too much or if you just want to show off how flash you are but with no characterisation like with steppenwolf then yeah, you will fail.

But a cgi thing could not only look great but could be great for some physical comedy too

 

[Dark Raven]

Thing probably needs to be done by mo-cap and CGI to look correct. Unless they can build a really comic accurate suit. But all of the FF require heavy CGI.

In Infinity War, in order for there to be extended scenes of Thanos, and not just for a few minutes, that probably meant that other people's screen time suffered here and there for budgetary reasons. The same could end up happening for FF, or at least the use of their powers.

 

[DawnWarrior]

Maybe the MCU Thing could be a combination of the two. On 'Falling Skies' for example, Doug Jones played this alien dude, and he wore a suit for the role, but they enhanced him with a little CGI for the blinking eyes and the veins and things like that.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

With the facial capture technology and the sheer size of the thing being able to be done well in CGI, he would benefit greatly from competent CGI work.

 

[Marvel united]

He's most likely going to be CG-Mocap like Thanos and Hulk.

 

[2kt09]

 

[Gamma Goliath]

Torch too. Theres no need to practically attempt torch. Maybe a trick here and there with actual fire. But the F4 are the kind of characters that are CG heavy in this day and age theres not much leeway around it.

 

[2kt09]

Torch too. Theres no need to practically attempt torch. Maybe a trick here and there with actual fire. But the F4 are the kind of characters that are CG heavy in this day and age theres not much leeway around it.

The Torch was never attempted practically even in the Corman movie, iirc

 

[Gamma Goliath]

Another poster had suggested it.

 

[Crimz]

I do believe though that Reed's powers could look better as a mix of CG and practical.
Seeing older horror movies where bodies contort in gruesome ways that don't look bad to this day makes me believe that that should be the used when doing Reed. You add CG to make it look even more real, CG alone just can't cut it when it comes to stretching powers.

 

[CaptainWagner]

How is this even a debate? Obviously their powers should be CGI. Are we still in the place that CGI automatically gets criticized just for existing? When will we be able to move beyond this?