Period piece or present day?

[Dark Raven]

I want Doom surrounded by large tape spools, giant computers with only 4MB of RAM, heavy CRT monitors that his Doombots need to lift etc.

 

[Detective Conan]

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.
View attachment 44058 View attachment 44059 View attachment 44060

Well I understand your point but you used one example. A lot of other examples of Kirby’s art don’t scream 60’s to me. Kirby’s design sense are just exaggerated sci-fi designs for the most part that are pretty much timeless.

So I don’t see how you can‘t do a modern film keeping in spirit with these designs.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

So I don’t see how you can‘t do a modern film keeping in spirit with these designs.

Can you make a modern film with Kirby influences? Yes.

Can you make a film that looks like a Kirby FF comic book come to life in a modern setting? No. Obviously because he drew those comic books in the 60’s. The clothes, cars, settings etc. were all drawn by somebody living in the ‘60’s.

And if there’s no intention to bring a Kirby comic book to life, I don’t see any reason set the film in the 60’s. That’s the point I’ve been trying to make.

 

[Detective Conan]

Can you make a modern film with Kirby influences? Yes.

Can you make a film that looks like a Kirby FF comic book come to life in a modern setting? No. Obviously because he drew those comic books in the 60’s. The clothes, cars, settings etc. were all drawn by somebody living in the ‘60’s.

And if there’s no intention to bring a Kirby comic book to life, I don’t see any reason set the film in the 60’s. That’s the point I’ve been trying to make.

I was under the impression you were only talking in terms of Kirby’s sci-fi tech like gadgets or equipment & laboratory designs. You showed me one example of a Kirby panel with tech designs and pointed out the anachronistic elements then I cited a few other examples of Kirby’s designs to service my point that by in large his stuff isn’t really specific to one era as they are mostly, weird, imaginative, larger than life designs so doing a movie set in modern day with them won’t look awkward, or strange as you think, imo.

As I said before, Marvel hewed pretty faithfully to Ditko’s 60’s psychedelic visuals in their present day set Doctor Strange film. So much so, that there were parts of the film that I thought was a Ditko panels come to life. That’s what I’m trying to get at. I guess our definition of bringing Kirby drawing to life differs from each other. When I think Jack Kirby I don’t necessarily think normal realistic designs specific to the 60’s. I think of stuff like this:

 

[Stark Bauer]

Can you make a modern film with Kirby influences? Yes.

Can you make a film that looks like a Kirby FF comic book come to life in a modern setting? No. Obviously because he drew those comic books in the 60’s. The clothes, cars, settings etc. were all drawn by somebody living in the ‘60’s.

And if there’s no intention to bring a Kirby comic book to life, I don’t see any reason set the film in the 60’s. That’s the point I’ve been trying to make.

why does a movie based on Ditko’s Doctor Strange art work visually without it being labelled as being too 60s?

 

[metaphysician]

why does a movie based on Ditko’s Doctor Strange art work visually without it being labelled as being too 60s?

Has anyone been complaining about the problem of the FF movie being "too 60s"? I know my complaint has not been the aesthetic, but about the narrative problems of actually setting it *in* the 60s. You can use whatever overall aesthetic you want; in particular, I think people are misunderstanding how much big, heavy machinery is still involved in the kind of high end science research that Richards would be doing. Rockets and particle accelerators are still rockets and particle accelerators.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

why does a movie based on Ditko’s Doctor Strange art work visually without it being labelled as being too 60s?

I’m not quite sure how to respond to this or how it relates to my comments.

They used some Ditko influences but set it in the present day. Just like I expect they will use some Kirby influences in FF and set it in the present day.

And I doubt anyone will label either as “too 60’s” because they won’t be.

I’m going to restate my position so it’s very clear because I think people are trying to argue with things I’ve never said.

1. I hope we get a modern FF film.
2. I hope that film uses Kirby influences.
3. I hope they don’t do a retro film.
4. IF they do a retro film, the only reason I can see to do that would be to not just use Kirby influences, but to literally use Kirby’s comics as the complete production design. (Sue with a ‘60’s hairdo, Reed wearing a coat and tie and smoking a pipe etc. etc. etc.)
5. Now that Peyton Reed will not be directing, I think it’s unlikely we will get a retro film, so I don’t think there’s any point in worrying about that anymore.

 

[Dark Raven]

I want retro designs in all of their technology. Star Trek Discovery and now Star Trek Strange New Worlds are using a retro-looking Starship Enterprise based on the original 60s design but with some modern fittings. It doesn't look so modernised like the Apple store version in JJ Abrams's Star Trek movies.

I would like to see a Fantasticar based on their flying bathtub. In fact, they should visit Bed, Bath and Beyond for some inspiration.

 

[Dark Raven]

If the Fantastic Four isn't actually set in the 1960s, it could use 1960s visuals and a colour palette like The Love Witch.

 

[Spider-Fan]

100% present day. I don't see anything of value added from doing it in the 60s. Did the 90s setting make Captain Marvel better? For me, no it mostly amounted to a few jokes and little else.. You can have a Kirby aesthetic modern day. Doing it into the 60s also hamstrings you with bringing them to the present somehow. That is great for Captain America, but not the FF.

 

[Crimz]

If the Fantastic Four isn't actually set in the 1960s, it could use 1960s visuals and a colour palette like The Love Witch.

I think that would be more unique than a period piece and give them their own flair. It would be really cool, but the MCU likes their films to look the same so I doubt it would ever happen. Even their films set in the past look exactly the same to ones in the present, visually.

 

[Crimz]

100% present day. I don't see anything of value added from doing it in the 60s. Did the 90s setting make Captain Marvel better? For me, no it mostly amounted to a few jokes and little else.. You can have a Kirby aesthetic modern day. Doing it into the 60s also hamstrings you with bringing them to the present somehow. That is great for Captain America, but not the FF.

Yeah it brings so many problems with it and the payoff isn't worth that. It messes with the MCU's timeline because why did no one mention them and act like Tony was the first ever superhero?
You can't have them interact with the time period properly because you have to have them leave as little impact on the world as possible for the MCU's history to make sense.
It's just so much better and easier to have them be from the present.

 

[Stark Bauer]

If the Fantastic Four isn't actually set in the 1960s, it could use 1960s visuals and a colour palette like The Love Witch.

i dont know iwhat that is but i prefer something like pleasantville

 

[Stark Bauer]

100% present day. I don't see anything of value added from doing it in the 60s. Did the 90s setting make Captain Marvel better? For me, no it mostly amounted to a few jokes and little else.. You can have a Kirby aesthetic modern day. Doing it into the 60s also hamstrings you with bringing them to the present somehow. That is great for Captain America, but not the FF.

did the 80s aesthetic do anything for stranger things? it depends on how it is executed. The Wonder Years and Brady Bunch kind of belong to their respective eras - they are special whether you like it or not. culture and values keep changing over time.

 

[Stark Bauer]

I think that would be more unique than a period piece and give them their own flair. It would be really cool, but the MCU likes their films to look the same so I doubt it would ever happen. Even their films set in the past look exactly the same to ones in the present, visually.

right i guess that is why wandavision was such a standout visually

 

[Stark Bauer]

Yeah it brings so many problems with it and the payoff isn't worth that. It messes with the MCU's timeline because why did no one mention them and act like Tony was the first ever superhero?
You can't have them interact with the time period properly because you have to have them leave as little impact on the world as possible for the MCU's history to make sense.
It's just so much better and easier to have them be from the present.

you could ask the same question in the first Iron Man. why didnt anyone mention Cap, the orignal Ant Man and Wasp, etc.

 

[Spider-Fan]

did the 80s aesthetic do anything for stranger things? it depends on how it is executed. The Wonder Years and Brady Bunch kind of belong to their respective eras - they are special whether you like it or not. culture and values keep changing over time.

Never watched Stranger Things, but yes it comes down to execution. But once again I don't see anything you cannot do in the 60s you cannot just do now, only you don't have to figure out how they come to the present or any of that. It is just simpler and easier to have the story take place now.

 

[Crimz]

you could ask the same question in the first Iron Man. why didnt anyone mention Cap, the orignal Ant Man and Wasp, etc.

Not the same at all. Cap was set up in the first phase when the MCU's history was being created and his story has always been him frozen then waking up in the present. It's built into the character.

Hank, Janet, and their inventions were intentionally kept secret from the public.

Captain Marvel was also kept secret from the public.

That's what the newer heroes set in the past have to be, kept secret. None of them have interacted with their time period in a significant way that FF would have to. The team are celebrities and the only way to make it work is to have them not be famous and shunted off into the present as soon as they get their powers. That would make either the film yet another origin that spends way too long on them before their powers, or skip them in the 60s entirely which makes them being from that time pointless.

It's more trouble than it's worth and it plays into the misconception that they only work in the 60s. It also adds the unnecessary "fish out of water" thing. There is no need to overcomplicate the team.

 

[Stark Bauer]

Not the same at all. Cap was set up in the first phase when the MCU's history was being created and his story has always been him frozen then waking up in the present. It's built into the character.

Hank, Janet, and their inventions were intentionally kept secret from the public.

Captain Marvel was also kept secret from the public.

That's what the newer heroes set in the past have to be, kept secret. None of them have interacted with their time period in a significant way that FF would have to. The team are celebrities and the only way to make it work is to have them not be famous and shunted off into the present as soon as they get their powers. That would make either the film yet another origin that spends way too long on them before their powers, or skip them in the 60s entirely which makes them being from that time pointless.

It's more trouble than it's worth and it plays into the misconception that they only work in the 60s. It also adds the unnecessary "fish out of water" thing. There is no need to overcomplicate the team.

I'm just glad that is Feige's problem. If anyone knows how to execute it, Feige does. Just don;t make them too woke for wokeness' sake.

 

[Dark Raven]

i dont know iwhat that is but i prefer something like pleasantville

The Love Witch is a horror movie made in the 2016 and set in the present but shot on film with 60s colours and visuals and lots of style. It looks like something right out of the 60s but they still use modern gadgets like cell phones and contemporary cars etc. It's more to be watched for the visuals than the horror. It has a look reminiscent of WandaVision. I'd post a trailer but it might not be quite suitable for this forum. You can search for it on YouTube though.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I'm just glad that is Feige's problem. If anyone knows how to execute it, Feige does. Just don;t make them too woke for wokeness' sake.

What does that even mean?

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

did the 80s aesthetic do anything for stranger things? it depends on how it is executed. The Wonder Years and Brady Bunch kind of belong to their respective eras - they are special whether you like it or not. culture and values keep changing over time.

As so much of ST is a riff on 80's pop culture yeah... There it does A LOT. It was also chosen specifically for how it plays into classic horror and sci Fi tropes that simply can't work today or by modern reality blunting their impact on the story.

1980's:
"Oh... It's spooky out here... I'm stranded in an unfamiliar place, in danger, with no hope of contacting anyone for miles and on top of that even if I meet someone they're not going to believe my tale of meeting a monster/ghoul/alien..."

2021:

"Well... I called an Uber, should be here in a few minutes... Thank God I got all this footage of the monster on my iPhone. Just upload it to my insta and YT channel. Ooh... When I talk to the local PD I should ask them to find out exactly where the monster's lair is by tracking where my phone went. We'll get GPS coordinates and then send a SWAT team to fire bomb the **** out of that bastard..."

 

[Stark Bauer]

What does that even mean?

killing off traditionally male leads in favour of female leads. the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy is a prime example. James Bond another, and Indiana Jones to be another. It is more than just this, it is also permeating gaming to a greater degree. Many films made in the 80s-90s would be labelled as "Toxic masculinity". I get inclusivity, that is fine by me. There a lot of different people groups. But forcing it when it doesn't feel right is so blatant and a cash grab. Alita Battle Angel is one of the few that portray a female lead as strong in the best way without putting down men.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

killing off traditionally male leads in favour of female leads. the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy is a prime example. James Bond another, and Indiana Jones to be another. It is more than just this, it is also permeating gaming to a greater degree. Many films made in the 80s-90s would be labelled as "Toxic masculinity". I get inclusivity, that is fine by me. There a lot of different people groups. But forcing it when it doesn't feel right is so blatant and a cash grab. Alita Battle Angel is one of the few that portray a female lead as strong in the best way without putting down men.

Ah...

A trash take.

Carry on.

 

[Stark Bauer]

Ah...

A trash take.

Carry on.

great argument/

TLJ doesnt capture the spirit of what made SW special..its supposed to uplift people and give you characters you can relate to. Unlike Rey who was OP at the start and showed little character growth or development. she was God tier. It really showed that the producers of the Sequel Trilogy are not fans of the franchise.

On the other hand you have people like Jon Favreau and Dave Filoni who are hardcore SW fans.

Mando got his ass owned over and over and he learned by failing...getting stronger every time. kind of like Luke. which is why The Mandalorian was superior and even Lucas gave his blessing.

back to Marvel, you will see Ironheart try in vain to be a suitable replacement for RDJ's Stark. It wont. It will fail spectacularly. It might be the movie that wakes up Marvel and Disney that they should stick to the legacy characters and not trying to pander to groups that are not the majority demographic. Which are male. Speaking of, how is the Ironheart series doing? Not an attack on gender, female led movies can be legendary - such as Aliens. I just dont like when diversity is being shoehorned/ being so forced and not organic. It makes for poor storytelling.

back on topic, I think FF will be excellent (Feige is much like Favreau and Filoni, he is a fan who gets Marevl) no matter whether it is period or not. Will it be more intriguing as a period? it depends if they can nail the Kirby aesthetic and make it different enough from Cap..