The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - Part 7

[Willie Lumpkin]

No, but I am talking about something related, being faithful in terms of details and being faithful in terms of spirit and really a movie could be more faithful in terms of details then another movie and the other movie could still be better.

Batman v Superman is more faithful then say X-2 in terms of details, like costumes, but X-2 is the superior film.

Plus if we are going to go with picky fan complaints, we can pick apart the MCU, there are still a ton of fanboys who are mad about the mandarin (who was a very dated character) and you can pick apart other things, Whiplash did not wear his comic book costume, because it sucks and the Guardians of the Galaxy certainly went its own way with some characters (Drax has a far more stream lined origin in the movie then in the comics).

Its hard to use the "just make it like the comics" when some elements have aged poorly, like the Mandarin or were never great to begin with, like Whiplash's costume, that is why an adaption needs to change some things.

Even the Dark Knight took some liberties, Joker looks that way due to make up, rather then getting that look after being dunked in chemicals.

Getting the spirit of something right is more important then getting the details, getting both the details and the spirit right is the best, but I will always choose getting the spirit right over getting details right.

The problem with the FF is Fox does not get this property, they at least have some idea why X-Men works, but they have no idea why the FF was popular. I would happy with Fox getting some of the details wrong, but getting the overall spirit right, but they have not done that.

I think the FF is harder to do then the X-Men, the X-Men has been adapted way more often into other media, with successful cartoons and video games, the FF cartoons have kinda lame in comparison and they have few video games (and the games are all terrible).

The X-Men has social commentary that is easy to present and be appreciated for, the FF's charms are bit more harder to explain and the FF can seem old fashioned compared some of other properties. That being said, if Marvel can make something like GOTG work, I think they could make the FF work as well, too bad Fox poisoned the well with that property.

I would agree with a lot of this and I would also say: "The reason BVS failed is it wasn't faithful to the comics."

Superman isn't a whiney, mopey character. His role isn't ambiguous. People don't wonder if he is a good-guy or a bad guy. He's a good guy who is always trying to do what he believes is right.

The morose, soul-searching superhero is a film cliche' that diverges from what made the comic-books great. It works for certain characters - like Batman, Punisher, Wolverine, but it has become far to common in comic-book films as everyone wants to make a 'serious' film.

If there had been a clearer contrast between Batman and Superman as Yin and Yang characters, the film could have been great (particularly if the resolution of that conflict had been meaningful with both characters recognizing and accepting their differences - instead that silly... I don't even know what to say about the 'Martha moment' ). But the film was ruined because both characters were variations of that ambiguous, introspective "oh how difficult it is to be a superhero" film cliche'.

...and the relevance to this thread is that was the worst mistake Fox made with FF. Fox wanted to make a 'serious' film with tortured, tormented characters and the idea was idiotic from the start.

 

[The Overlord]

I tend to over look a lot of comic films made before 2008 with the exception of the 2 first Spidey films and the first two X films and Batman Begins. Most of rest were either lame cash grabs or just poorly made films. 2008 revival happens and expectations change. You dont make a film like FFINO and think you will be taken seriously. Studios cant do thay anymore. There was no legitimate attempt by Fox to make a decent film. Same with Sony making GR2. I will say I think Sony and even WB to an extent were trying to make truly entertaining films with Spidey and Bats/Supes. At least the intent was there. FOX truly **** on FF. No respect whatsoever.

I still like the first Batman film and the first two Superman films, dated as they are.

And really can argue both Suicide Squad and Batman v Superman were rushed attempts to cash in on Marvel's success. They are better then FFINO, but that is not saying much.

I think the good Batman, Superman, X-Men and Spider-Man films did set the stage for the MCU though.

I would agree with a lot of this and I would also say: "The reason BVS failed is it wasn't faithful to the comics."

Superman isn't a whiney, mopey character. His role isn't ambiguous. People don't wonder if he is a good-guy or a bad guy. He's a good guy who is always trying to do what he believes is right.

The morose, soul-searching superhero is a film cliche' that diverges from what made the comic-books great. It works for certain characters - like Batman, Punisher, Wolverine, but it has become far to common in comic-book films as everyone wants to make a 'serious' film.

If there had been a clearer contrast between Batman and Superman as Yin and Yang characters, the film could have been great (particularly if the resolution of that conflict had been meaningful with both characters recognizing and accepting their differences - instead that silly... I don't even know what to say about the 'Martha moment' ). But the film was ruined because both characters were variations of that ambiguous, introspective "oh how difficult it is to be a superhero" film cliche'.

...and the relevance to this thread is that was the worst mistake Fox made with FF. Fox wanted to make a 'serious' film with tortured, tormented characters and the idea was idiotic from the start.

I would agree with that, Marvel is being smart and taking all the dark and tortured characters in the MU and giving them their own Netflix spin off shows, that gives them room to breathe and not be a huge contrast to the more light hearted characters in the films. This why someone like Daredevil or Jessica Jones works best on the Netflix shows, so we get different aspects of Marvel explored in the movies and in the Netflix shows. The fact that these shows are longer give these characters more screen to develop and the Netflix villains are among the best of the MCU.

Its a shame that Purple Man and William Stryker have gotten way better on screen adaptions then Doom has.

I am just saying DC got the details right and the spirit wrong in Batman v Superman, X2 got the details wrong, but the spirit right and it is the superior film. FFINO got both wrong and it is worse then Batman v Superman and there is no point comparing it X2, that is just not a contest.

But going back to things that could be improved with an FF film adaption, there is an easy weak spot in the FF mythos, every villain who is not Dr. Doom, Galactus and Annihilus (even Annihilus is only written well sometimes). Guys like Wizard, Red Ghost and Puppet Master are pretty dull, one note villains, guys like Mole Man and Mad Thinker have their moments, but those moments are often ignored and buried under more stories were they are generic bad guys. Giving some of these guys more personality is must if, we are going to go with a non Dr. Doom villain next time.

 

[Dark Raven]

I would agree with a lot of this and I would also say: "The reason BVS failed is it wasn't faithful to the comics."

Superman isn't a whiney, mopey character. His role isn't ambiguous. People don't wonder if he is a good-guy or a bad guy. He's a good guy who is always trying to do what he believes is right.

The morose, soul-searching superhero is a film cliche' that diverges from what made the comic-books great. It works for certain characters - like Batman, Punisher, Wolverine, but it has become far to common in comic-book films as everyone wants to make a 'serious' film.

If there had been a clearer contrast between Batman and Superman as Yin and Yang characters, the film could have been great (particularly if the resolution of that conflict had been meaningful with both characters recognizing and accepting their differences - instead that silly... I don't even know what to say about the 'Martha moment' ). But the film was ruined because both characters were variations of that ambiguous, introspective "oh how difficult it is to be a superhero" film cliche'.

...and the relevance to this thread is that was the worst mistake Fox made with FF. Fox wanted to make a 'serious' film with tortured, tormented characters and the idea was idiotic from the start.

FFINO defenders didn't think so at the time. They thought it was a fresh and interesting take on a tired franchise. Every aberration was seen instead as a new iteration or spin. Some of the defenders even planned to see the movie 10 times!

 

[The Overlord]

FFINO defenders didn't think so at the time. They thought it was a fresh and interesting take on a tired franchise. Every aberration was seen instead as a new iteration or spin. Some of the defenders even planned to see the movie 10 times!

Considering its box office take, I don't think that happened, I think this film lost a lot of support as the news came on and lost the rest when it was released, so I don't think those defenders still exist.

I was willing to defend the film at first, maybe being a bit contrarian and I just wanted to hope this movie might be good, because it was going to be made either way and I thought maybe Fox learned a lesson from past lessons. Though I gave up after they made Doom a hacker and I never seen the film, even though I can watch it on Canadian Netflix any time I want. So I was wrong, but I can live with that.

I have listed to lots of reviews of the film though, this one is pretty brutal (and long):

http://www.normalmovies.com/?offset=1464142844334

Its on a website that reviews comic book movies and they have said this is the worst film they reviewed.

 

[Spiderine]

I still like the first Batman film and the first two Superman films, dated as they are.

And really can argue both Suicide Squad and Batman v Superman were rushed attempts to cash in on Marvel's success. They are better then FFINO, but that is not saying much.

I think the good Batman, Superman, X-Men and Spider-Man films did set the stage for the MCU though.

Yeah......love them too but I was mainly talking about the post 2000 comic movie boom that started with Xmen. There were a lot of bad to mediocre films in the mid 2000s that nearly doomed the genre. Then we got IM and TDK and its been rolling since.

Sony and WB obviously wanted to cash in on the universe building thing thats become the norm now. But I think they thought their approach was to at least make an entertaining enough film to achieve that with the resources they put in it. I dont know what the hell Fox was doing. Nobody would do that in 2015.

 

[Web-Head]

All I know is, this needs to happen in the MCU

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

Human Torch joining Spider-Man's school as the new popular guy is a big missed opportunity

 

[Web-Head]

Human Torch joining Spider-Man's school as the new popular guy is a big missed opportunity

I was just thinking that too. Maybe college?

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

I was just thinking that too. Maybe college?

Spider-Man in the MCU should take advantage of the team up.


The Avengers are all like 10-15+ years older than him.

A young hero to be Spider-Man's buddy would be cool.


I know Scarlet Witch & Captain Marvel will be future bff. Someone similar for Spider-Man would be good.


Maybe making some of The Power Pack kids actually cool for live action

 

[Dark Raven]

Human Torch joining Spider-Man's school as the new popular guy is a big missed opportunity

They can still do that. It's not like Peter Parker has finished school.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I will say I think Sony and even WB to an extent were trying to make truly entertaining films with Spidey and Bats/Supes. At least the intent was there. FOX truly **** on FF. No respect whatsoever.

Yeah, I think there's a HUGE difference between some Sony and Marvel and WB films that missed the mark vs. Fant4stic which was done with absolute, undisguised contempt for the characters and fans.

We can't even begin to compare films like ASM2, Avengers AOU or BVS to Fant4stic.

It's like the difference between someone hitting the target but missing the bullseye vs, someone blindfolded and shooting in the opposite direction of the target.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

They can still do that. It's not like Peter Parker has finished school.

Now THAT's keeping hope alive.

Imagine this: Genius scientists Reed Richards and Victor Von Doom along with test pilot Ben Grimm are introduced in Infinity Wars as they work with Tony Stark on a new spacecraft.

And in a completely different film (Homecoming 2) we meet Johnny Storm and his sister Sue.t:

 

[First Avenger]

Yeah, I think there's a HUGE difference between some Sony and Marvel and WB films that missed the mark vs. Fant4stic which was done with absolute, undisguised contempt for the characters and fans.

We can't even begin to compare films like ASM2, Avengers AOU or BVS to Fant4stic.

It's like the difference between someone hitting the target but missing the bullseye vs, someone blindfolded and shooting in the opposite direction of the target.

AoU imo is in another league compared to ASM2 and BvS. X-Men Apocalypse is close to these two.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

AoU imo is in another league compared to ASM2 and BvS. X-Men Apocalypse is close to these two.

... but those different leagues are like Single A, Double A, Triple A baseball vs. Fant4stic's T-ball... for blind kids.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Now THAT's keeping hope alive.

Imagine this: Genius scientists Reed Richards and Victor Von Doom along with test pilot Ben Grimm are introduced in Infinity Wars as they work with Tony Stark on a new spacecraft.

And in a completely different film (Homecoming 2) we meet Johnny Storm and his sister Sue.t:

The spacecraft uses an Infinity Stone for it's drive. Doom's interest is in the Infinity Stone and Stark's technology which he believes can allow him to open a portal to the Netherworld and allow him to bring his mother back.

Richards sees Doom's notes and warns him that his calculations are off, but Doom pushes forward and believes he has to go immediately since he has been discovered.

There is a spectacular explosion that does extensive damage to the facility and presumably kills Doom.

Having learned his lesson from Ultron, Stark decides he shouldn't dabble in things he doesn't understand and orders the spacecraft destroyed. Richards recognizes the value of the spacecraft and pleads with him to not destroy it. He understands the stone in a way Stark can't and also understands that Doom's accident wasn't from a lack of understanding but pride, arrogance and haste.

Richards has only 10 hours before the spacecraft will be destroyed and he needs a four person crew, but there are only four people he can truly trust to help him and not turn him in (he is dating Sue now after he met her through Stark's connection to Peter Parker). Richards, just like Doom, is driven by pride, arrogance and haste.

The four of them sneak past the guards, launch the spacecraft and disappear.

(note, all of that is less than 10 minutes screen time in a much larger story and some of the actual details are only hinted at and not specifically shown).

After credits scene. Doom, with a bandaged face is struggling against the snow and wind in a mountain region. He collapses and the scene fades out.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

I'd rather the FF just have been away on 8 year mission in space or something.


Would anyone be interested in Matty McGod being Osborne and instead of killing Stacey he'd kill Pepper Potts leading to like Iron Man 4 (Demon in a Bottle) type story.

 

[Zant]

Marvel already did Demon in a bottle.Its called Iron man 2.

What are the chances of FOX doing spin off films from their Fantastic 4 library. The recent revelations about Ego and Kang shows that they may have a lot more characters than we think. Why else would they hold on to the rights? I think they may some spin off potentials with some of the characters they have.

 

[Dark Raven]

Stark is not really an alcoholic in the MCU, and the general audience probably don't perceive him as such. In IM3, when suffering from PTSD, or in the fallout from AOU, he didn't turn to the bottle. It's not really a habit for him.

 

[Zant]

Stark is not really an alcoholic in the MCU, and the general audience probably don't perceive him as such. In IM3, when suffering from PTSD, or in the fallout from AOU, he didn't turn to the bottle. It's not really a habit for him.

Maybe alcohol is part of the no smoking rule for the Marvel heroes. Drax did get drunk in Guardians, I think.

 

[wobbly]

Maybe alcohol is part of the no smoking rule for the Marvel heroes. Drax did get drunk in Guardians, I think.

Stan Lee got himself legless in AOU

 

[Zarex]

What are the chances of FOX doing spin off films from their Fantastic 4 library. The recent revelations about Ego and Kang shows that they may have a lot more characters than we think. Why else would they hold on to the rights? I think they may some spin off potentials with some of the characters they have.

Folks have speculated that FOX is clinging like grim death to the FF rights, which haven't earned the company a dime in over a decade, because neither side has announced the details of the X-Men TV agreement. My belief is that the FF is either back at Marvel or on their way back home. We shall see.

The problem with spinoffs is a) we don't know if they will extend the rights agreement b) Outside of Wyatt Wingfoot the FF supporting cast is awfully pricey to put on-screen and c) No one has any interest in seeing that film.

 

[Zant]

Stan Lee got himself legless in AOU

"Excelsior". What Stan drank was not from our world lol.

 

[Dark Raven]

What was Stan Lee's cameo in AOU? I can't even remember what it was in Civil War.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Marvel already did Demon in a bottle.Its called Iron man 2.

What are the chances of FOX doing spin off films from their Fantastic 4 library. The recent revelations about Ego and Kang shows that they may have a lot more characters than we think. Why else would they hold on to the rights? I think they may some spin off potentials with some of the characters they have.

Folks have speculated that FOX is clinging like grim death to the FF rights, which haven't earned the company a dime in over a decade, because neither side has announced the details of the X-Men TV agreement. My belief is that the FF is either back at Marvel or on their way back home. We shall see.

The problem with spinoffs is a) we don't know if they will extend the rights agreement b) Outside of Wyatt Wingfoot the FF supporting cast is awfully pricey to put on-screen and c) No one has any interest in seeing that film.

If Fox can't do FF, how could they do something that was a harder sell?

Consider Silver Surfer - which I think would be the best option. Compared to FF, Silver Surfer has a much smaller built-in audience. People may recognize the character, but most people don't know him well enough to just show up on opening day. They'll need to be convinced with compelling trailers, good reviews and good word of mouth. If Fox can't come through with those elements (and, come on, this is Fox we're talking about), they're going to have trouble making back even a small budget.

... and Silver Surfer isn't a low-budget property. He's from another planet. They won't just be able to film in NYC. They'll need to create every set and location. Specially designed costumes and props, A lot of green screen and CGI. Characters like Galactus and SS who won't be easy to do. etc. etc. etc.

Silver Surfer will be much more expensive and much more difficult to pull off than FF.

A studio that couldn't come close to pulling off FF couldn't possibly make a SS film - particularly for an audience that will be so opposed to the idea that they'll hate it from the start.

 

[Zant]

Deadpool, Antman were not exactly easy sells. The General Audience don't really care about built in fanbase or if its an A-lister or not.If it looks appealing enough they will show up. I do agree that the biggest problem is the budget. I would watch a Kang origin story for example if it looks good enough.