Why I think Story/Fox are starting off wrong

[X-Rated]

Seriously dude, the brow is just not that big of a deal. The portrayal of the character and the story is most important. I guess the brow is important to some, I understand that. I think I would be a little pist if Batman didn't have the pointed ears.

 

[HoratioRome]

While I'm more Zen and less rabid than Wilhelm, I have to agree 100% with Wilhelm's analogy. If the brow isn't an issue, why has it been one of the most talked about items since we first got a look at the Thing?

you know, every once in a while intelligent people will get into a discussion. They will say very accurate and smart things but somehow will miss hitting the mark.
Then, out of the blue, someone will come along and utter a single simple phrase which crystallizes the point.
You've just done that sir. Bravo

 

[HoratioRome]

LOL! Sure. Part of it is that we've been talking about these films for the last 3 or 4 years, and we have to talk about something. . .

. . . but consider Johnny's hair. Sure, it should have been medium length blonde like the comics, and it doesn't make any sense that they changed it, but it's also not that big of a deal. Johnny's hair is not as iconic as the Thing's face. Now if Johnny, instead of having a red-yellow flame had a blue green flame, I think people would have been more upset. Johnny's flame is his important, visual characteristic, and Ben's body/face is his. Fortunately they nailed Johnny's flame, so his hair seems like less of an issue, and people aren't going to spend much time talking/worrying about it.

Brilliant, BRILLIANT

 

[HoratioRome]

No rocks, even more face, even more expressions. Maybe they should remove the mask entirely.

I think I'm in love.
Ok, ok, not THAT kind of love,....

 

[TripleF]

you know, everyone once in a while intelligent people will get into a discussion. They will say very accurate and smart things but somehow will miss hitting the mark.
Then, out of the blue, someone will come along and utter a single simple phrase which crystallizes the point.
You've just done sir. Bravo

Ok, so from what you've said, I take it that---If someone thinks that the look of Thing is ok and they didn't have a problem with it, they are unintelligent? and, the only intelligent opinion is one that says "Thing must have a brow in order for people to enjoy him as a character, as a superhero."

If I'm incorrect, I'll stand corrected. But, in my opinion, thats what it looks like. "Everyone once in a while intelligent people will get into a discussion?" "They will say very accurate and smart things, but somehow will miss hitting the mark?" Maybe their opinion is simply different from yours. Doesn't mean they aren't hitting a mark, just means they aren't hitting your particular mark.

I'm sorry, I guess the intelligent, and accurate stuff through me off.

 

[X-Rated]

Ok, so from what you've said, I take it that---If someone thinks that the look of Thing is ok and they didn't have a problem with it, they are unintelligent? and, the only intelligent opinion is one that says "Thing must have a brow in order for people to enjoy him as a character, as a superhero."

If I'm incorrect, I'll stand corrected. But, in my opinion, thats what it looks like. "Everyone once in a while intelligent people will get into a discussion?" "They will say very accurate and smart things, but somehow will miss hitting the mark?" Maybe their opinion is simply different from yours. Doesn't mean they aren't hitting a mark, just means they aren't hitting your particular mark.

I'm sorry, I guess the intelligent, and accurate stuff through me off.

You know TripleF, everyone once in a while intelligent people will get into a discussion. They will say very accurate and smart things but somehow will miss hitting the mark. Then, out of the blue, someone will come along and utter a single simple phrase which crystallizes the point.
You've just done that sir. Bravo!

 

[TripleF]

You know TripleF, everyone once in a while intelligent people will get into a discussion. They will say very accurate and smart things but somehow will miss hitting the mark. Then, out of the blue, someone will come along and utter a single simple phrase which crystallizes the point.
You've just done that sir. Bravo!

So does that mean you agree with my opinion, cause thats all it is. Nothing overtly intelligent about it or accurate, just kind of how I see it.

 

[Malus]

I'm sorry, I guess the intelligent, and accurate stuff through me off.

Aw, man... <bites tounge...>

 

[Sentinel X]

What is the big deal with tall guys running around in circles throwing a rubber ball through a hoop?
What is the big deal with a man and a woman reverting to their natural, nude state and working up pleasurable friction?
What's the big deal with nailing a guy to a piece of wood and hiding boiled eggs?

I asked first,okay!

 

[TripleF]

Aw, man... <bites tounge...>

*threw*

 

[Carp Man]

I agree with much of what you say, but I think that it was the wholesale abandonment of superheroes in the 1950's that made Superman and Batman such icons. There were many popular heroes in the 40's by Fawcett and Timely. But by 1950, only Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman were in print by DC, Fawcett published Captain Marvel fot a few more years, and Timely became Atlas and went into everything BUT heroes.

That's why you haven't seen REAL Marvel movies until lately. It took that long for the generations of 1960's and later Marvel fans to grow up and bring Marvel characters into the American mass consciousness.

Well thanks, but anyone who has been around these boards the past year and a half, know I have no problem stating my point of view, and I don't care if anyone agrees with it or not. The Thing 2005 cares not. No big brow makes me very happy. Some want him to look like an idiot. If Story says it would not look as good as many think, since he knows more about film making then 99.9 % of the people here, including myself, I will defer to his judgement. So this is a mute point. No big brow, accept it and enjoy the Thing as he is. I agree. And as i stated Batman and Superman we're the only superheros in town at that time, and my generation carried it on till today, and unless these franchises are introduced to todays audience, once my generation dies out, that will be the downturn of superhero movies. Superman and Batman must be introduced to todays kids. So they will love the charactors as much as we did as kids, and in todays world, with all the different pulls, I really do not know if that is possible.

 

[HoratioRome]

Ok, so from what you've said, I take it that---If someone thinks that the look of Thing is ok and they didn't have a problem with it, they are unintelligent? and, the only intelligent opinion is one that says "Thing must have a brow in order for people to enjoy him as a character, as a superhero."

If I'm incorrect, I'll stand corrected. But, in my opinion, thats what it looks like. "Everyone once in a while intelligent people will get into a discussion?" "They will say very accurate and smart things, but somehow will miss hitting the mark?" Maybe their opinion is simply different from yours. Doesn't mean they aren't hitting a mark, just means they aren't hitting your particular mark.

I'm sorry, I guess the intelligent, and accurate stuff through me off.

DAMN it I hate when I do that! I meant to write EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, not EVERYONE once in a while.

anyway triple you sure read a lot in this comment. you must be some kind of mind reader or prophet. why didn't you assume that the "intelligent people" involved in the discussion included those with opposing views? that can happen you know. intelligent people can disagree with one another.
I guess unintelligent people may not realize that t: t:

oh come on, just joking.

the second part of your post actually contradicts the first part. from my comment it is Clear that the people missing "hitting the mark" are intelligent so if you claim their opinion is different from mine, It must mean that I consider those with a different opinion to be intelligent. but if that's the case, the first part of your post makes no sense?

look, to answer your question, liking the no brow thing is not a reflection of anyone's intelligence.
NOT realizing its importance and its value in the face of such controversy IS.
That was Willie's point.

 

[X-Rated]

No big brow makes me very happy. Some want him to look like an idiot. If Story says it would not look as good as many think, since he knows more about film making then 99.9 % of the people here, including myself, I will defer to his judgement. So this is a mute point. No big brow, accept it and enjoy the Thing as he is. I agree.

Carp Man, every once in a while intelligent people will get into a discussion. They will say very accurate and smart things but somehow will miss hitting the mark. Then, out of the blue, someone will come along and utter a single simple phrase which crystallizes the point.
You've just done that sir. Great post! Bravo!

 

[TripleF]

DAMN it I hate when I do that! I meant to write EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, not EVERYONE once in a while.

anyway triple you sure read a lot in this comment. you must be some kind of mind reader or prophet. why didn't you assume that the "intelligent people" involved in the discussion included those with opposing views? that can happen you know. intelligent people can disagree with one another.
I guess unintelligent people may not realize that t: t:

oh come on, just joking.

the second part of your post actually contradicts the first part. from my comment it is Clear that the people missing "hitting the mark" are intelligent so if you claim their opinion is different from mine, It must mean that I consider those with a different opinion to be intelligent. but if that's the case, the first part of your post makes no sense?

look, to answer your question, liking the no brow thing is not a reflection of anyone's intelligence.
NOT realizing its importance and its value in the face of such controversy IS.
That was Willie's point.

As I stated in my post, If I'm wrong I will stand corrected. Honestly, I'm not sure what you just wrote, or what it means. My post simply meant, one's view on something doesn't necessarily show their intelligence. How they state their view certainly can and ususally does, in my opinion.

As I read some of the posts around here, I must admit, a few of yours as well, it seems that some (a few) posts come across as one's intelligence is shown through their opinion resembling mine (yours). I'm certainly not saying THAT IS WHAT YOU MEAN, I'm just calling it as I see it. I tend to do that quite often, and sometimes I've missed the mark in my interpretation of someone's opinion. If I have, my apologies, and I'll move on. If I haven't, then consistency will show that down the line. Willie and Malus have made their points very clear, and the consistency that I see in their posts is one of respect, and blinder-free opinions. They give their opinion with passion, intelligence, knowledge, and again a respect almost teaching quality to those that may lack the knowledge of this comic. That is very cool to see, and as I've read around here over the last 2 years, thats what I've seen on a consistent basis from both.

Now, Malus' "spell check obsession" not withstanding, and his love of a multi-colored Galactus of the "Romper Room Primary Color" side of the track, I enjoy his posts very much. t: And even enjoy the occassional dig. *bites tongue*

Final statement on this issue, Thing's brow, I bow to the ideas of WS, you, Malus and Willie. I myself saw no problem with it in the first movie, but I will hope with strong hope that it is fixed to you guys satisfaction in the sequel, and leave it at that.

BTW, I enjoyed the hell out of Batman Begins and Superman, both on my all-time favorite comic book movies list. I wasn't a big fan of either as a kid, nor did the movies make me a fan of the comics today. But, I'll definitely be at the first showing of their sequels in the future.

 

[gerbstat]

Well thanks, but anyone who has been around these boards the past year and a half, know I have no problem stating my point of view, and I don't care if anyone agrees with it or not. The Thing 2005 cares not. No big brow makes me very happy. Some want him to look like an idiot. If Story says it would not look as good as many think, since he knows more about film making then 99.9 % of the people here, including myself, I will defer to his judgement. So this is a mute point. No big brow, accept it and enjoy the Thing as he is. I agree. And as i stated Batman and Superman we're the only superheros in town at that time, and my generation carried it on till today, and unless these franchises are introduced to todays audience, once my generation dies out, that will be the downturn of superhero movies. Superman and Batman must be introduced to todays kids. So they will love the charactors as much as we did as kids, and in todays world, with all the different pulls, I really do not know if that is possible.

Uh......ok,...well..um....You GO for it Carp Man! Do your thing!

 

[gambitfire]

Back in the 30's and 40's, Superman and Batman was all there was. You did not have all the different charctors you have today.

This doesn't make them have any less of a "personality"

If Superman started today, or Batman it would be loss in the crowd, but back then there was no crowd.

Maybe Superman considering he's too powerful and has no credible weakness but Batman would deffinetley work. He's a one of a kind, There is no other hero like him (Human and able to hold their own against supers)

The Superman TV show was made in the 50's. Batman did not really take off till the TV series in the mid 60's (of which I am still a huge fan of ). TV introduced Superman and Batman to the masses.

Yea and this goes against what you say since this was a totally different Batman to the one the world was introduced too.

The kids of the 50's and 60's who grew up with TV, have kept Superman, and Batman alive all these years. Same with the FF, my generation.

Yea but Batman has gone back to his original character.

That is why SR did not do as well as planned, kids of today do not know Superman. Superman must be repackaged to appeal to the kids of today.

Kids of today have ADD they want more boom for their money, so in order to "repackage" the character you would have to sell out and basically go popcorn on everyone. Look at POTC i love it don't get me wrong but it's the greatest popcorn example.

So when you are the only show in town, for 3 decades, it is easy to be bigger then the FF.

[/quote]
Yes true but what's more interesting, family issues with superpowers or haunted pass no family and darkness while fighiting villains without having superpowers . too each his own but Batman while he is a signature character and successful for being the first of his kind, he till today remains one of the few of his kind and best at that. I just don't think saying he has no personality is fair. He's dark that's his thing. Like Johnny is funny, or Reed is smart, Sue is passionate, and Ben is haunted and sweet.

I love the FF but i find Batman more mysterious and interesting so careful next time you go around insulting another persons favorite characters with your loud outspoke opinions.

 

[Carp Man]

Mabey I should have said "limited personality". As for popcorn flicks, POTC 2's boxoffice Vs SR's boxoffice. Point made. POTC 2 over a billion WW, SR strugling to make 400 WW. Summer popcorn movies work. Much rather have a disfunctual family, then a person trying to find themselfs for 6 decades. The Thing rules!!!!!!!!!! Best comic charactor ever created. The total package. The sequel will be more all that, plus a bag of chips more then the 1st one was. I am a FF fanatic 1st, last, and always. I shall continue to have my loud, outspoken opinions.

 

[TripleF]

Mabey I should have said "limited personality". As for popcorn flicks, POTC 2's boxoffice Vs SR's boxoffice. Point made. POTC 2 over a billion WW, SR strugling to make 400 WW. Summer popcorn movies work. Much rather have a disfunctual family, then a person trying to find themselfs for 6 decades. The Thing rules!!!!!!!!!! Best comic charactor ever created. The total package. The sequel will be more all that, plus a bag of chips more then the 1st one was. I am a FF fanatic 1st, last, and always. I shall continue to have my loud, outspoken opinions.

"disfunctual family" LOL, I like that.


Yeah.

 

[gambitfire]

Carp by your logic F4 1 should of been good while BB should of bombed .

Besides Spider-man hasn't been popcorn so blah. I guess it all depends on the movie really. While POTC was popcorn it tried to take itself seriously......to a point .

 

[Saint]

A Silver Surfer love triangle is probably the worst idea ever.

 

[gambitfire]

^Most deffinetley agreed.

 

[Malus]

A Silver Surfer love triangle is probably the worst idea ever.

There's been no confirmation of this.
Most likely they are using Sue & Reed as stand-ins for Alicia & Ben, in that Sue will try to empathise with the Surfer and understand him. Reed may feel threatened by that, as Ben did. Anybody not familiar with the original story should seek it out, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
All this "triangle" talk stems from a remark Alba made in an interview, a cryptic remark at that.
I seriously doubt the Surfer's going to be "getting busy" with anybody.

 

[HoratioRome]

There's been no confirmation of this.
Most likely they are using Sue & Reed as stand-ins for Alicia & Ben, in that Sue will try to empathise with the Surfer and understand him. Reed may feel threatened by that, as Ben did. Anybody not familiar with the original story should seek it out, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
All this "triangle" talk stems from a remark Alba made in an interview, a cryptic remark at that.
I seriously doubt the Surfer's going to be "getting busy" with anybody.

I don't think anyone thinks that SS is going to "get busy". I think the concern is that this dynamic of empathy and feeling threatned and so on works much better with Ben than it does with Sue. The reason is works so well with ben is because of the dicotamy which exists within Thing. He is both strong, yet vulnerable and insecure. to bring that insecurity to Mf.F really diminishes him, and also doesn't work as well because Mr.F isn't a "monster" on the outside. it's just a mistake all around to make that change when it could just as easily be done with the Thing.

 

[TripleF]

There's been no confirmation of this.
Most likely they are using Sue & Reed as stand-ins for Alicia & Ben, in that Sue will try to empathise with the Surfer and understand him. Reed may feel threatened by that, as Ben did. Anybody not familiar with the original story should seek it out, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
All this "triangle" talk stems from a remark Alba made in an interview, a cryptic remark at that.
I seriously doubt the Surfer's going to be "getting busy" with anybody.

Exactly.

How hard is it to understand that Sue and her personality could very easily see the Surfer as a lost soul, and want to help him. He in turn is attracted to this beautiful, sympathetic woman who is far different than what he thought humans were all about. Reed could see his (surfer) as a physical attraction/ along with their competition as scientists.

To me thats not that hard to comprehend happening, nor is it that bad of a storyline. I think it would be cool, and VERY IN CHARACTER for this to happen.

Look at the so called "love triangle" of the first movie. Where was Reed's jealousy, no where. Where was Sue's physical attraction to Victor, no where. What was Victor's attraction to Sue, something he simply did not have and wanted.

So why does this love triangle have to be the "soap opera" love triangle that everyone thought the first would be, and wasn't.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I don't think it's worth worrying too much about one sentence that Jessica Alba said long before the script was finalized.

We don't know if she was talking about the Surfer (or, as someone else mentioned, it could have been a joke about Franklin) and even if she was talking about the Surfer, the script very well could have changed since then . . . or Jessica may have been speculating that there would be something there even without any direct knowledge of the script.

In any case, there's absolutely no sense in making judgements on such a minor, vague mention.