Story Gives FF2 Update

[zer00]

Well based on the Ghostbusters films I dont think he would have wimped out and thought the original Galactus too 'cheesy' to be done on screen.
Handled right the idea can be done well and remain faithful to the source.

Sadly, it does seem atm there's no-one working on this film that has the guts, imagination or faith to work with that. Hope Story proves me wrong, but I doubt it.

You do realize the having the marsmellow man giant was played for laughs right?

 

[The Apatow Crew]

You do realize the having the marsmellow man giant was played for laughs right?

Plus it was 1984. lol

 

[Spider-Fan]

I really don't think the size will be an issue. I think his look is more of a liability for laughs. I say change his look, maybe make him look less human, and he should work fine. I know many disagree, and I have been in the debates to prove it, but that is what I think.

 

[wobbly]

You do realize the having the marsmellow man giant was played for laughs right?

Of course both Ghostbusters films were played with tongue firmly in cheek and yes, the Staypuft marshmallow man was one big sight gag, but remember he also used the Statue of Liberty in the second movie, and the use of that idea wasn't about providing a few belly laughs.

Anyways, to re-iterate the point, based on his work with ghostbusters I don't think he would have a problem working with the original idea.

 

[wobbly]

I really don't think the size will be an issue. I think his look is more of a liability for laughs. I say change his look, maybe make him look less human, and he should work fine. I know many disagree, and I have been in the debates to prove it, but that is what I think.

Making him a giant can work, but dressing him in lurid purple armor, spandex leggings and the mother of all helmets won't. As you say, his classic look exactly translated to film would be a liability for laughs.
But that is the only thing about him that needs to be altered imo: cosmetic adjustments to remove or mute those elements that obviously wont translate well to live action.

 

[Kelly]

Making him a giant can work, but dressing him in lurid purple armor, spandex leggings and the mother of all helmets won't. As you say, his classic look exactly translated to film would be a liability for laughs.
But that is the only thing about him that needs to be altered imo: cosmetic adjustments to remove or mute those elements that obviously wont translate well to live action.

I'm moving toward agreeing with you Woobly....

 

[gerbstat]

 

[Kelly]

Repost of what I put in the "Hail Galactus.." thread. There's already too many threads with the same subject matter and we're a year away...

I still say that a physical Galactus IS NOT NECESSARY to the film, if and when he appears. Nobody has confirmed the Galactus storyline for the second film yet anyway.

Any way they do it - costume, makeup, CGI, whatever will disappoint somebody. They could do it completely with a voice and physical manifestations of his will, such as the converter appearing, the carrier nimbus, storm effects, etc.

Does anyone remember actually seeing God/Yahweh/Jehovah in the DeMille classic The Ten Commandments? Of course not, but the scenes and presence were still pretty awe-inspiring.

You know, if Galactus is so damn powerful, why did he ever need to speak to the Fantastic Four (in the original trilogy) anyway? Let the Surfer earn his keep and be the intermediary.

An unseen Galactus is really the only way to go - makes sense from an artistic perspective and a financial one.

Reading is a lost art on these boards.......Drakon tried to take care of that, but no one reads what he wrote, even as an Announcement.

 

[Malus]

Quote:
Originally Posted by HoratioRome
ALL I can say is NO ultimate crap.

The Ultimate series has sold incredibly well.

So did albums by Tiffany and Vanilla Ice. But now, years later, they're largely regarded as jokes. And if there's one thing the last 25 years of following the comics market has shown me, it's that fans are often willing to buy tons of crap.

 

[Ulic Queldroma]

I'm moving toward agreeing with you Woobly....

Me too.

 

[Ulic Queldroma]

Repost of what I put in the "Hail Galactus.." thread. There's already too many threads with the same subject matter and we're a year away...

I still say that a physical Galactus IS NOT NECESSARY to the film, if and when he appears. Nobody has confirmed the Galactus storyline for the second film yet anyway.

Any way they do it - costume, makeup, CGI, whatever will disappoint somebody. They could do it completely with a voice and physical manifestations of his will, such as the converter appearing, the carrier nimbus, storm effects, etc.

Does anyone remember actually seeing God/Yahweh/Jehovah in the DeMille classic The Ten Commandments? Of course not, but the scenes and presence were still pretty awe-inspiring.

You know, if Galactus is so damn powerful, why did he ever need to speak to the Fantastic Four (in the original trilogy) anyway? Let the Surfer earn his keep and be the intermediary.

An unseen Galactus is really the only way to go - makes sense from an artistic perspective and a financial one.

This is also a googd point/idea.

 

[GhostPoet]

Quote:
Originally Posted by HoratioRome
ALL I can say is NO ultimate crap.




So did albums by Tiffany and Vanilla Ice. But now, years later, they're largely regarded as jokes. And if there's one thing the last 25 years of following the comics market has shown me, it's that fans are often willing to buy tons of crap.

Just making a point that directors/producers are going to use what sells. Not what a fan base wants.

 

[kirbyfan]

I disagree about Galactus uniform, Kirbys design is perfect for the technology of today. The colors can be muted down and the armor can have a very technical look following kirbys design. It can be done, and it can look very interesting!