Period piece or present day?

I don’t know if this has ever been stated or even theorized, but I always kind if assumed Stan and Jack based Sue at least partly on Grace Kelly.

t-grace-kelly-may-2010-archive.jpg

I don't know if they did or not either, but I wouldn't be surprised.
 
My vote goes to present day.

Putting them in the 60s would be the most predictable thing that Marvel has done, and then it would also raise more questions. Why haven't we heard about them before? Why haven't Hank Pym or Janet ever discussed them and the old adventures?

I think visually it would be beautiful in the 60s and a lot of Easter eggs you could do, but just keep the action in the present.
 
My vote goes to present day.

Putting them in the 60s would be the most predictable thing that Marvel has done, and then it would also raise more questions. Why haven't we heard about them before? Why haven't Hank Pym or Janet ever discussed them and the old adventures?

They have, lots of time. Just last week Hank, Janet, Hope and Scott (along with his oddly different looking daughter, Cassie) had dinner at the beachside victorian to catch up and hear stories about the old days. And the stories they told about the First Family....well, we will all have to wait for the movie to hear about them.
 
Tbf Hank and Janet operated in the 80's its plenty possible they'd have no knowledge of them, and it they were just astronauts in the 60's and went missing no one in the Superhero game would have any reason to mention them.

That's true. Putting it in real world terms, When we think about the space program of the 60s today, Neil Armstrong is probably the name most recognized today by the average Joe and Jane, but alot of the other astronauts and important names in the Space race which were common knowledge in the early to mid 60s, probably don't come to mind to the vast majority of people in 2021.

Heck ,alot of the names I've put forward as models for Sue were well known and popular actresses with their own tv and film careers in the 60s, and I'd venture alot of the posters here have never heard them, let alone the general public today.

Important events, people, and moments can be do forgotten, and what was once common knowledge can be a revelation to a future generation.

So the idea that Hank and Janet, let alone Peter Parker may not have heard of them is wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility.
 
Many of the viewers watching WandaVision have no idea what some of the sitcoms referenced are and it goes over their heads. Many of the classic Hollywood stars are even forgotten about by today's audiences. Only if you're a film or history buff or have lived through these previous eras will you think of some of these people.

How often do we mention Amelia Earhart in every day conversation? She went missing. Maybe the same could be said of the FF.
 
Many of the viewers watching WandaVision have no idea what some of the sitcoms referenced are and it goes over their heads. Many of the classic Hollywood stars are even forgotten about by today's audiences. Only if you're a film or history buff or have lived through these previous eras will you think of some of these people.

How often do we mention Amelia Earhart in every day conversation? She went missing. Maybe the same could be said of the FF.

Good Points. I know the "It was Agatha All Along" hit is pretty much the Theme to The Munsters Tv show , but I'm in my 40s, and most of the younger people don't even know who the Munsters were.

I grew up in the 80s, and at that time, the 1960s were only 20 years in the past. The cast members of the 60s tv shows were still alive, and the shows of the 50s and 60s were still being rerun all the time then. So they were still in the pop culture consciousness.

Daydream Believer is one of my favorite songs by the Monkees (, who actually had their own tv show ) and that was a huge hit song in the 60s. But the song was trending on twitter after Wandavision because alot of viewers didn't know even which band did it.
 
The 60s somehow felt longer away from the 80s though than the 90s does from the 2020s. Maybe that's because I was younger then, and time passes more quickly when you're older. Plus I wasn't alive in the 60s so never lived through it.
 
I think the chances of a retro setting decreased greatly when Peyton Reed didn’t get it, and the chances of Johnny showing up in Spider-man 3 increased when Watts did get it.
 
My vote goes to present day.

Putting them in the 60s would be the most predictable thing that Marvel has done, and then it would also raise more questions. Why haven't we heard about them before? Why haven't Hank Pym or Janet ever discussed them and the old adventures?

I think visually it would be beautiful in the 60s and a lot of Easter eggs you could do, but just keep the action in the present.

frankly Hank Pym wasn’t even mentioned in any of the MCU films before Ant Man was released- they just relied on the audiences’ suspension of disbelief and they got away with it.
 
The 60s somehow felt longer away from the 80s though than the 90s does from the 2020s. Maybe that's because I was younger then, and time passes more quickly when you're older. Plus I wasn't alive in the 60s so never lived through it.

I was a generation removed from the 1960s as a kid in the 80s and 90s , but The Munsters, Bewitched, The Monkees, Gilligan's Island etc, were being rerun on the local networks in addition to Nick at Nite ,so alot of kids my age knew about the actors, the characters, the theme songs and such from the 1960s.

Even though the 60s seemed far away, all this content felt new to me since I wasn't around during the original airdates.

But , it was different time. Now the younger people are hooked retro shows like Stranger Things , and that takes place when I was growing up.
 
In terms of other decades they haven't really mined yet, if the go for the 70s era Sue , there's always Pepper Pott's mom

Blythe Danner

220px-Blythe_Danner_-_1980.jpg
images


There's always the iconic Farah Fawcett big hair if they really wanted to lean into the 70s look


There's also the equally Iconic Bionic Woman Lindsay Wagner look. She also could have played a 70s Carol Danvers .


Then there's always the WKRP looks of Jan Smithers and Loni Anderson

For a 70s Johnny Storm they could go for the Jan Michael Vincent look or the He-Man cut


Or they could go for that others 70s young actor who became famous I think:cwink:



If they want to have an 80s setting and play up the 80s archetypal TV mom and dad , they could always base the Sue and Reed looks off of Joanna Kerns and Alan Thicke.

interesting idea and I wouldn’t hate it but if you go for the 60s you sort of hit that JFK early era of space travel kind of fun which would be really cool to explore.

Oh my gosh this thread had 7 pages already! Unbelievable!
 
Another mid 60s Sue storm look they could go for is the Tippi Hendren Birds era hair style and fashion.

TippiHerden.jpg

c5d6cbee89ddf7a73c8a14dcfbf5119c.png


There's also the glamourous and trendy look of the British Avengers legend Honor Blackman
Honor-Blackman.png

1650-2.jpg



Alex Ross used Russell Johnson as a Model for his Marvel's series , so if they want to evoke the Professor from Gilligan's island as a model for Reed
reed_professor.jpg

executiontz6.jpg

170px-The_Professor_%28Gilligan%27s_Island%29.jpg


If they want to go with a 20 something Johnny Storm in the 60s, the producers could always go for the Robert Redford more conservative hair cut from 1966 Barefoot in the Park
4855eb0a74025dac4b88a953a184f7e42c7364c2.gifv

redford.jpg


If they wanna go for more of a 1950s and early 1960s look for Johnny , there's always the clean cut, boy next door, Troy Donahue look

american-actor-troy-donahue-circa-1965-picture-id1024695482



In terms of physical stature, I picture Ben Grimm being a towering bear of a figure even before the transformation, so I think of someone like Dan Blocker from Bonanza who was pretty big at 6'4 and pretty imposing.

He wasn't ripped at all , but you still wouldn't want to get on his bad side, and his transformation would make him look even more threatening.
Dan%2BBlocker%2Byear%2Bbook%2Bphoto.jpg
7a7eb00cf33f15a2dead647e1eb456e3--gazette-year-old.jpg

Original-Vintage-Photo-1950s-Dan-Blocker.jpg



If they want to capture the look of the types of Astronaut suits of the 50s and 60s

14e032cb470270426ea020732a21ea66.jpg

hqdefault.jpg
 
Plus, if they do the 60s they could have a really sassy HERBIE like Rosie the Robot from the Jetsons


 
I very much do not want a period piece, because the Fantastic Four aren't about the past. They are about the future. Setting them in the past fundamentally changes their entire core theme, all in the name of. . . aesthetics? Aesthetics that can be whatever someone wants anyway? Not a good idea.
 
I very much do not want a period piece, because the Fantastic Four aren't about the past. They are about the future. Setting them in the past fundamentally changes their entire core theme, all in the name of. . . aesthetics? Aesthetics that can be whatever someone wants anyway? Not a good idea.

ok Pym was from the past but was way ahead of his time and ahead of the curve. Just because Reed is from the 60s doesn’t mean his mind isn’t decades ahead in terms of innovation and sheer intellect. I would argue scientists back then were light years more intelligent. Can we compare Einstein and Oppenheimer to the likes of whoever the leading scientists of today are? Men landed on the moon in the 60s and that hasn’t happened since. Who is more advanced? Future generations have less brain power. They are over reliant on machines to do the thinking for them. Most kids can’t even do cursive handwriting. Personally I believe the ancient Egyptians were way ahead of many modern day civilizations- we don’t have to the technology to build the ancient pyramids
 
Ok you could do like a 60s inspired fusion future. Like, not just making it look like an Apple store but making it fun and funky and trippy. We know from Doctor strange and Mysterio marvel can definitely do that
 
It would be super cool to see Reed with like, an 8 1/2 oceans eleven type charm



like really understated and cool
 
Ok you could do like a 60s inspired fusion future. Like, not just making it look like an Apple store but making it fun and funky and trippy. We know from Doctor strange and Mysterio marvel can definitely do that

My biggest interest in a retro film would be to translate, as literally as possible, Kirby’s panels directly to the screen - and that would be kind of trippy.

But now that Peyton Reed is out, I don’t think we’re going to get that, and I’ve really lost interest in all the baggage that would come with a retro setting.
 
I strongly dislike the period piece idea. I want to see Peter and Johnny as equals. I don’t want Peter showing a wide-eyed Johnny what a ****ing Nintendo is. Those man out of time performances can be done well (Evans in TWS or Avengers) or TERRIBLY (Chris Pine in WW84).
 
My biggest interest in a retro film would be to translate, as literally as possible, Kirby’s panels directly to the screen - and that would be kind of trippy.

But now that Peyton Reed is out, I don’t think we’re going to get that, and I’ve really lost interest in all the baggage that would come with a retro setting.
I don’t think there’s really anything 60’s or retro about Kirby’s design technology at all as it all comes straight from Kirby’s imagination. It isn’t realistic. Its timeless fantasy designs that isn’t particularly reflective of any time period. So you don’t need the movie to be set in the swinging 60’s to get a faithful translation of Kirby’s design aesthetics. Thor Ragnarok managed to do a fairly decent translation of those old 60’s Kirby designs and that movie was set in the present. Doctor Strange managed to translate 60’s Ditko panels and designs into a modern film just fine. Why can’t another FF film set in the present do the same thing with Kirby designs?
 
Last edited:
Kurt Busiek(writer of Marvels) has interesting thoughts on this subject that I felt were relevant to this thread. He’s in favor of a modern day FF movie.

 
Last edited:
ok Pym was from the past but was way ahead of his time and ahead of the curve. Just because Reed is from the 60s doesn’t mean his mind isn’t decades ahead in terms of innovation and sheer intellect. I would argue scientists back then were light years more intelligent. Can we compare Einstein and Oppenheimer to the likes of whoever the leading scientists of today are? Men landed on the moon in the 60s and that hasn’t happened since. Who is more advanced? Future generations have less brain power. They are over reliant on machines to do the thinking for them. Most kids can’t even do cursive handwriting. Personally I believe the ancient Egyptians were way ahead of many modern day civilizations- we don’t have to the technology to build the ancient pyramids
Sure, but I think what @metaphysician is really getting at is by making the team time travelers from the past you’re basically forcing a man-out-of-time story onto the characters when their story has never been about that...at all. The FF’s spirit lies in the present not the past. Reed Richards, and by extension the team are futurists that aspires to make the current world a better place. Their story isn’t tied to a certain era like Captain America is so there’s no real point in making them come from the past. You are correct that there were scientists in history like Einstein that were ahead of their time, yes, but why not make Mr. Fantastic ahead of our time? Why not make him a modern day Thomas Edison or Nikola Telsa? I think that’s a way more effective way to introduce a character who’s supposed to be the world’s smartest man to modern audiences than simply making him some time-displaced fish-out-of-water character who has to play catch-up to all the innovations and breakthroughs made in technology when he was gone. That isn’t very interesting to me, it isn’t necessary as it adds an element to Reed that’s never been part of the source material.

Comic book writer Kurt Busiek also weighed in on this subject.

EwNur7iU8AEba4P


I have to agree with this sentiment.
 
Last edited:
I can see arguments on both sides.

I personally don't see anything inherent in the F4 that it must be set in modern day.

The strongest argument against setting it in the past, is that you want all of the F4 library of characters to interact with the modern day MCU characters.

Yeah, you could explain that F4 team was trapped in some type of time warp or whatever , but would Doctor Doom, Alicia Masters, The Mole Man, Galactus etc, also be trapped as well?

If they weren't , then several of the human characters would be in their 80s at the youngest today.

I would think that they'd want Fury , SWORD, Spiderman, Hulk etc to interact with an emerging threat of Doom, Galactus, etc as opposed to those characters being quite old today.

You want these characters and their supporting casts to be able to interact with the current roster of characters in the MCU as opposed to being isolated to the 60s.

To me , that's the real set back to making F4 a period piece, even though i'd be totally down for that.

The other arguments against a past setting really don't address the most obvious setback to having them in the 60s .
 
I don’t think there’s really anything 60’s or retro about Kirby’s design technology at all as it all comes straight from Kirby’s imagination. It isn’t realistic. Its timeless fantasy designs that isn’t particularly reflective of any time period. So you don’t need the movie to be set in the swinging 60’s to get a faithful translation of Kirby’s design aesthetics. Thor Ragnarok managed to do a fairly decent translation of those old 60’s Kirby designs and that movie was set in the present. Doctor Strange managed to translate 60’s Ditko panels and designs into a modern film just fine. Why can’t another FF film set in the present do the same thing with Kirby designs?

I think the issue is “high-tech” back then was very different than high-tech today.

Back then, computers and video screens were big and bulky. Electronic devices used vacuum tubes. Devices had switches, relays etc.


Today those bulky devices are replaced by tiny microchips and touchscreens.

Consider these photos. Compare the interior of a Gemini capsule to the modern Space X Dragon.

Then look at the Kirby drawing of Doom surrounded by his bulky technology and consider how wrong that would look in a modern setting.

But it’s also not just about the technology. I’m talking about pinning Kirby panels to the wall and saying: “This is it. This our movie.” And that doesn’t just mean the technology. That means the clothes and the cars and the architecture...

And if they’re not going to do that kind of direct translation, I don’t see any reason to set it in the past.

B1F0FFC8-498C-4BEF-B3EF-EA5B07F7EFCF.jpeg 43E3F1EF-A8B2-48EB-A3EB-FCD370983BEA.jpeg 56E639B3-FE98-4D16-ACC5-906E55896CDE.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,786
Messages
21,812,556
Members
45,626
Latest member
SunStorm333
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"