The "Critique The Critics!" Thread (MAJOR SPOILERS, ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK)

Well i saw it and I've come to realize that FOX SHOULD NOT MAKE ANY MORE COMINC FILMS. My hope is that Marvel is successful with their offferings like IM and others and they build up enough power to get the rites of the Xmen, SS and F4 the hell away from FOX. I wouldn't mind waiting 10 years to see another F4 or Xmen film. Just so long as FOX has nothing to do with it. I do not want to see an FF 3, Magneto, X4 or anything from that studio regarding marvel.

Can you imagine how the Harry Potter films would've turned out if FOX had control? I know Harry potter isn't a comic character, but those films were done quite well and one of the few franchises were each installment is better then the last. In my opinion of course.

I'm done getting mad and worked uped over these films from FOX. FOX makes these comic films for god knows who, but the fans it ain't. You have to balance out the film to appeal to both fans and non fans alike. I'm not going to go into a negative rant just yet, cuase i'l rather wait until everyone here sees the movie, but i saw no need for some of the changes that differs from the comic. FOX and the people they hire just do not get these comic characters and their concepts. For the life of me i do not understand why this Don Payne was hired to write the movie when you have good writers at marvel, or at least bring them on to consult.
 
^ I don't agree with your statement above as it's written but I do 100% that the best studio to make Marvel films is Marvel Studios. Let's juts be happy they made enough money to start their studio division and still have characters like: Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Avengers, Black Panther, etc...

Marvel would get Punisher back at the end of this year but LGF is rushing it out. Also we'd get Daredevil and Elektra back next year. So things will get better.

Still just enjoy the show for what it is and be happy we're seeing this stuff on the big screen. Next year Iron Man & Hulk are gonna be up there with Spidey 2 and Batman Begins. Watch.
 
Advanced Dark said:
^ I don't agree with your statement above as it's written but I do 100% that the best studio to make Marvel films is Marvel Studios. Let's juts be happy they made enough money to start their studio division and still have characters like: Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Avengers, Black Panther, etc...

Marvel would get Punisher back at the end of this year but LGF is rushing it out. Also we'd get Daredevil and Elektra back next year. So things will get better.

Still just enjoy the show for what it is and be happy we're seeing this stuff on the big screen. Next year Iron Man & Hulk are gonna be up there with Spidey 2 and Batman Begins. Watch.
Click to expand...


But why would you want to see a crap film? ESPECIALLY if it's a bastardisation of something you previously adored?
 
was it bad? not at all. was the surfer great? moreso when it was man-in-suit and not poorly lip-synced cg surfer. what sucked? Alba looks so weird and Julian is just horrible.

More great Doom dialogue? "Nice!" "Let's go for a spin!"

should it have been a longer movie and gone into the Surfer and Galactus itself? you damn well know it. this movie blazed by. but for what it was, it was good. and so long as it's at Fox, this isn't all that bad. but it could be much much better. much better.

Doug looked FANTASTIC as the Surfer.

PS. I bought a ticket for another movie and went to see F4-2. I refuse to support a franchise that the studio purposefully develops to be under-par.
 
Cyrusbales said:
But why would you want to see a crap film? ESPECIALLY if it's a bastardisation of something you previously adored?
Click to expand...

You're quite the snob there Cyrus. Are you going to hold a gun to our heads and force us to listen to Tchaikovsky and burn our Madonna and Beyonce CDs?

All directors have a 'vision' (as do their creative team). Bryan Singer chose to enhance and focus on the oppression/discrimination of the X-Men, even though the comics aren't all set in darkness with Storm never flying, Jean turned into a doctor, Iceman turned into a student who is in class with Pyro.

Tim Story chose to enhance and focus on the family dynamic of the Fantastic Four, and their 'struggle' with celebrity. Those elements do exist in the comics. Thing and Torch do squabble, Susan does try to hold things together and be mature and responsible.

Mainstream critics who complained about the family dynamic with its struggles, squabbles and humour didn't understand that this is an essential element of the Fantastic Four. It's like going to see a comedy and complaining that it's funny or going to a horror movie and complaining it's scary.

The fact that some critics gave this 1 out of 5 and some gave it 4 out of 5 shows there is no universal standard by which to judge film. People these days tend to ignore critics if they like the subject matter anyway, or they tend to follow a critic with whom they generally agree.

The general public view superhero movies as a whole, a genre. A man dressed as a bat or a man in cape from a fictional planet gets the same response from people in my office as a movie about mutants or a movie about four people with extreme powers including stretchy limbs, invisibility, a body like a cracked driveway and a man who can go on fire.

One critic in the UK (in the Daily Mirror) said that whereas Batman Begins and Superman Returns were family movies, FF2 was a kiddies' movie. For that reason he hated it. Well, for a start BB and SR were not family movies at all - they were adult movies; any little kid would be bored watching them. The first FF was definitely more kid-oriented (I know that for sure from the people with kids who saw it) and this one is more family-oriented. But that doesn't make it wrong.

When you have a man made of orange, creviced rock, and a man with elastic limbs, this is not going to be The Godfather or The Unforgiven. It instantly is a fantasy movie. Turning this into an arthouse flick would have created another over-indulgent Hulk. And the FF are not like that, and neither is Hulk.
 
^^ Ok I just got back from seeing the movie. I will write up my full review later tonight and it should be available by the time you wake up tomorrow.

I have seen 5 movies this year; Ghost Rider, 300, TMNT, Spiderman, and now Fantastic Four.

I liked Ghost Rider, Spiderman and loved TMNT, 300 and now Fantastic Four. I knew I would cause I liked the first one but thought that I might not be able to overcome the change in Galactus.

Well I missed the Gman, can't say I did not but again the movie I saw was the Fantastic Four and they were a family. Incidentally that space storm looked kind of frightening.

I talked to a few people after and everyone said they enjoyed it, One older lady preferred Spiderman # 1 (not a lot of love for S2 or 3) but she put it in the same category as that movie in terms of enjoyment for her.

Actually for someone that had very few lines the Surfer Rocked and Laurence did very well on the voice.

Doug Jones did a terrific job and his depowered performance was beautiful, I mean he was alien.

Also Alicia was so sweet.

I hope it does well man, the theater manager said it was doing ok, he thought if it has any kind of numbers later this evening like 300 around 9 pm then it might break out as it already has the family crowd coming in.

Ok so that is it for now. It remains to be seen if it can overcome the fanboy negativity who seem to want to kill this franchise.

I am happy with Tim Story and all the actors this movie was very tightly done and just had excelent pacing.

Of course I needed a half hour more as I am an FF junkie.
 
The Only Woj said:
was it bad? not at all. was the surfer great? moreso when it was man-in-suit and not poorly lip-synced cg surfer. what sucked? Alba looks so weird and Julian is just horrible.

More great Doom dialogue? "Nice!" "Let's go for a spin!"

should it have been a longer movie and gone into the Surfer and Galactus itself? you damn well know it. this movie blazed by. but for what it was, it was good. and so long as it's at Fox, this isn't all that bad. but it could be much much better. much better.

Doug looked FANTASTIC as the Surfer.

PS. I bought a ticket for another movie and went to see F4-2. I refuse to support a franchise that the studio purposefully develops to be under-par.
Click to expand...

umm. less money for Fox means less of a risk they will take with another which means short running time and other stuff.

Think about it.
 
Since this is supposed to be about CRITIQUING THE CRITICS, I'm going to post another review for your reading pleasure...

From The Portland Oregonian...

'Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer'
See Photos:
1
Friday, June 15, 2007
MIKE RUSSELL

Last time we checked in on the Fantastic Four, they were busy stinking up the joint.

"Fantastic Four" (2005) was a big hit and a galactic waste of raw material. There's nothing wrong with taking a Space Age comic about superhero scientists and adapting it into a movie for kids. The problem lies in forgetting to make that movie exciting, well-written or even slightly logical.

Sure, the filmmakers got a few things right: Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) and The Thing (Michael Chiklis) had a great bickering-kid relationship right out of the comics. But otherwise, the film consisted almost entirely of superheroes having silly arguments in sillier costumes in barely connected scenes that built to an action climax that never happened. (And it sure didn't help that "Fantastic Four" debuted in the long, long shadow of "The Incredibles.")

All the above make it almost weird to write that the sequel, "Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer," is . . . well . . . not terrible. In fact, "Rise of the Silver Surfer" is roughly 300 percent less cringe-inducing than its predecessor. (Feel free to blurb that, 20th Century Fox.)

It's better-written, better-looking, better-acted and tells a faster-moving story than the first movie. Maybe it was my lower expectations going in, but I'd actually argue that "Surfer" succeeds on its own modest terms better than the more ambitious "Spider-Man 3" or "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End."

The sequel adapts one of comics' most revered superhero sagas: Stan Lee and Jack Kirby's "Galactus Trilogy," which kicked off in 1966 and featured the Fantastic Four fighting a planet-destroying demigod whose coming is heralded by a silver alien who flies on a surfboard-shaped rocket and talks like a Beat philosopher.

It's one of those stories that could be Pop art on the page and just cosmically silly on-screen. (Did I mention that, in the comics, the planet-destroyer is a giant wearing a purple-finned helmet?) But returning director Tim Story and his screenwriters actually do a decent job of making all of this palatable -- removing helmet fins as needed and interweaving the doomsday crisis with subplots involving corrupt Army flunkies, the return of Victor Von Doom (Julian McMahon), Johnny learning to be a team player, and stretchy Reed (Ioan Gruffudd) and invisible Sue (Jessica Alba) finding time to get married amid all the paparazzi and apocalypse.

The Surfer himself (voice by Laurence Fishburne, body by Doug Jones) looks iconic and cool. There are a couple of well-staged action smackdowns. The stakes are believably high. Kids are going to love it.

However, a movie can be 300 percent less cringe-inducing than the first "Fantastic Four" and still have problems. On paper, the Four are the perfect Pop Age superheroes, and while "Surfer" represents a major step up for the franchise, they still haven't gotten their full due on-screen. Grown-up viewers might find themselves asking reasonable questions:

Why is Doctor Doom so clumsily reinserted into the lives of our heroes? Why is Reed holding his bachelor party in the most brightly lit nightclub in film history? Did The Thing really need to belch like that . . . ever? Why are the powers and weaknesses of the Surfer and Galactus so ill-defined? And, most annoyingly for adults, why is poor Jessica Alba (who's clearly taken some acting classes in the past two years) playing a geneticist who performs nary an act of geneticism -- instead supporting or scolding Reed and worrying about her Magic Princess Day as much as she worries about the end of the world?

So, yes: You can still nitpick the franchise. Maybe the biggest compliment I can offer to the filmmakers this time around is that their fun, fast-moving story doesn't actively invite those nitpicks while you're watching it.

(92 minutes, rated PG, multiple locations) Grade: B-
Click to expand...

Well I guess now we have some thoughts on what non-comic fans think of Galactus. :dry:
 
the a1ant said:
So far it has an average B rating at Yahoo! Movie among users (1020 ratings as of this posting):

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809699127/user

Looks to be just like the first. Horrible critic reviews, but a large number of the general public enjoy the film.
Click to expand...

yeah, and that's the important part. The publics are the ones who pay to watch the movie and can say if they liked it or not, as a public or fan.

Critics get paid just to critic badly a film. I mean, I never read a real critic say something good about a movie.
 
There are but film critics tend to stereotype and prejudge films based on the who's and what's behind them.

They also figure it below them and questionable to their intelligence to give a fair review to an ok film.

There seems to be no such thing as ok when you're a Critic it's either complete garbage or a film Majestry..

I mean look at the way they right reviews, these are the ppl who couldn't cut it as writers.

lol I know I'm stereotyping Professional Movie Critics but it's part of the fun in what I'm saying.
 
The critique from the Associated Press is ironic. He/she praises the areas that are improved upon since the first film. But he/she suprisingly misses the other good parts that make the films. The writer doesn't seem to understand science fiction or what makes the FF superheroes.
 
HI GUYS, I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT JESSICA ALBA IS GOING TO BE ON CONAN IN A FEW MINUTES, ENJOY!!!:D:up:
 
GUUUAAARRDDDIIIIAANNN....STOP....good lord...lol
 
gambitfire said:
^ I'm confused, I thought you didn't like the movie.... :dry:
Click to expand...

No, not much. But Harry just said publicly what I've been saying for a year about how the Surfer was done, and thumbed his nose at Fox and their *ahem* well, let's call them what they are. Lies. Juuuust sayin' ... ;)

HM
 
Having just watched the movie again for a second time, I must say that it is a better experience. I've gone from thinking it was reasonably entertaining and fun to thinking it was actually really good and faithful to the spirit of the FF lore.

This will be long....

As I was searching the net for reviews (Rotten tomatoes,etc) what struck me about many of them was the unprofessional and irrational hate for everything the movie stands for. An example of which is the slur that it is a 'kiddies film' or even questioning why the film is so light and doesn't take itself serious. This started me off thinking about the whole film review process fore these type of movies, that is unashamedly comic book family types.

It seems to be seen as credible as a comic book movie you have to be dark and be striving to be taken seriously by tackling serious themes and subtext. Singer played up the homophobia subtext in X2 and Hulk the issue of repressed emotions and distant fathers, when most fans just wanted to see there characters faithfully translated. I'm not saying that these themes aren't in the comics, but at times I've felt that they've been overplayed to appeal to the critics. After all, most critics seem to want to experience high brow art in the movie theaterrs and you get the impression that comic book movies are beneath them (with few exceptions). Some critics act as if the genre should be gone by now and its outstaying its welcome.

So my belief is that a film like FF2 has a problem in that it is too unprententious and light for critics and not literal enough for hardcore fans. We somehow need a middle ground in terms of reviews, mainstream critics may rag on ity because they have to compare it with other films in the genre (why are the FF bickering?etc) and fans will nitpick over every detail. I'm not sure in review terms the FF can win this battle.:csad:
 
3 Dev Adam said:
Meh. Red ***** got paid to write that. I'd rather believe the review from the TwitchFilm.com guy. That was also very positive.
Click to expand...

Erm ... by whom? Get a grip. But no matter - he said what needed to be said about how the Surfer was created, even though I disagree with him about the quality and substance of the film. Harry says what the hell he likes. Can't stand the man, but gotta give him cred for thumbing his nose at Fox's lies.

HM
 
http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=reviews&id=10723
REVIEW: FANTASTIC FOUR - RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER (JEREMY'S TAKE)
06.15.07
By Jeremy Smith

There is no movie here.

The Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer does many things most movies do in that it features a variety of characters striving to attain a variety of objectives, many of which are in direct opposition to one another. This is called conflict, and, in a classical narrative motion picture, conflict keeps the audience from bolting the theater after the first act. It is wise to have conflict in one's movie.

It is also wise to have a point. That's where this sequel comes up disastrously short - i.e. "disastrously" for those who aren't obediently sated by a handful of pre-vis'd set pieces broken up by the appearance of character development. In one lazily written stock scene after another, 20th Century Fox exhibits a stunning contempt for ticket buyers willing to line up for a second go-round with Reed Richards and the gang after getting what they wanted out of the first movie (which I have not seen). "This movie doesn't have to be good or clever or even appealing," they seem to be saying. "It just has to be."

But it isn't. Yes, it's opening in thousands of theaters around the country, and, yes, it will make a good deal of money over the next month, but, in lieu of engaging its audience, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer will merely induce a trance state for ninety minutes. Spectacle will occasionally fill the screen accompanied by loud explosions and whirrs and whooshes, a "character" will sacrifice their life to save the world (ain't that always the way), and, then, it will end. And its viewers, held captive by the promise of a good time at the movies, will be returned to the world they left ninety minutes earlier as if nothing had happened.

And this is actually the goal of 20th Century Fox's inert $100 million-plus investment. Tom Rothman and his development execs are counting on the audience's willingness to accept this synthetic agglomeration of sturm und drang mit Alba as a substitute for a genuinely involving motion picture. That they will doubtless be proven right this weekend makes the release of Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer far more thrilling than the experience of communing with its cacophonous nothingness for the length of a vigorous workout at the gym. If ticket buyers are willing to accept this movie substitute, the day of the temperamental, quality-obsessed director is at an end. Finally, Rothman will have his revenge; it will be enough to pay a couple of above-average screenwriters a tidy sum to pen 100 pages of stock scenes and corny dialogue, and then hand the pile of paper over to an easily controlled director who has no ambition other than the next gig. Who needs troublemakers when you have a city full of pliant dupes eager to do the company's bidding in exchange for a house in the hills and a fleet of Bentleys?

But be not mistaken: Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer is not merely white noise. It comes equipped with attractive elements. There is the lovely and untalented Alba, who squeezes pleasingly into an assortment of formfitting wear; there is the joshing camaraderie of the team, which at times evokes one's fondness for the comic books (while reminding one that Peyton Reed could've done something truly special with this material); and there is the Silver Surfer, a triumph a design and a failure of writing (his tête-à-têtes with Sue Storm elicited gales of mocking laughter from my midnight-screening audience).

Tonally, 20th Century Fox's product gives off glimmers of what might've been had they tried to make a movie, but to engage the viewer means to risk losing them. Placating is so much easier. Welcome to the anti-movie. And get used to it.

2.0 out of 10
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Movies205
Movies205's Review and Discussion Thread: Vol. 3- Revenge of the Elitist Porcupines!
10 11 12
Replies
294
Views
20K
Killgore
Killgore
S
World The Spider-Ham Fan Art/Manip Thread
Replies
2
Views
3K
Climperoonie
Climperoonie
Dread
BOUGHT/THOUGHT Thread for 6/14/06: SPOILERS Inside!
4 5 6
Replies
140
Views
8K
Horrorfan
Horrorfan

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 3,698 (members: 26, guests: 3,672)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,288
Messages
22,079,706
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"