QuoteFantastic 4 Reboot Film Has No Relation to the Comics
Remember how ticked off everyone got when they found out the studios cast a black actor as the Human Torch and a white actress for his sister Sue Storm? Well there apparently was good reason for them not clarifying why this brother and sister duo are bi-racial. That's because nothing in the movie has anything to do with the comics. Period.
Apparently the director has thrown everything about the comics out the window. There likely won't be any fancy costumes, the characters won't be called "The Fantastic 4" in the movie itself, and no part of the plot is going to be related to ANY prior comic storyline. The actress for Sue Storm asked if she should read any of the comics to get caught up and the director told her "don't bother."
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/136178-Fantastic-Four-Reboot-Movie-Wont-Be-Based-on-Any-Comics
ok seriously what the hell.
So, instead of getting a serious, well-done reboot that can be built off of for future films, we're getting a What If...? story, that, even if it gets any sequels, will require *another* reboot later down the road to get back to the mainstream characters, and probably alienate more potential legacy viewers than attract new ones to the not-quite franchise. Good job Fox. <_<
Seriously, Disney needs to get their heads out of the sand and stop looking at the short term for these licensed properties, and realize they will make *way* more money in the long run by doing whatever they need to do to get the rights to X-Men, Spider-Man, and the Fantastic Four back into the hands of Marvel. The success of the Avengers line of movies (including the solo movies) should be proof enough that they know what they're doing.
Yeah, those Marvel losers are basing all of their movies on the comics, and that's obviously not working. Why should you be at all concerned with source material that has lasted for half a century?
Now, to be fair, this is drawn from one quote by the actress, passing along one conversation with the director, but I could hardly say I'd put it past Hollywood. The producer's description of the film does seem to support this nonsense. Gah, the Fantastic Four, much like Superman, are characters that don't lend themselves to 'grim and gritty.' They're the original champions of wonder in the Marvel U, all about adventure, family, and exploration! Sure, there's melodrama and the like, but there's nothing "grounded" about them!
PG, while I agree, I imagine that it may not be easy for Disney to get the rights back to these films. The other studios have as great an interest in keeping them out of Marvel's apparently golden grasp as they do in capitalizing on the 'hey, you know what's hot right now?' version of what passes for wisdom in the film industry. They can attempt to (ineptly) cash in on the superhero craze on the one hand and prevent Marvel from milking this property on the other. That wouldn't be that big of a problem, except that they're really bad it, and we, the fans, suffer because of their stupidity.
Pfft, you're just all upset over the Black Johnny Storm :P
But no, seriously, I'm not surprised by this at all. I've heard nothing good about this project at all, and my expectations for it are not high. And frankly... I'm glad for that. I hope this movie crashes and burns and that Fox gives up and gives the rights back to Marvel.
I also wonder if this is just Fox's way to do just enough to maintain the rights. I recall reading about another franchise a while back and how the current studio was able to get the rights to make the new movie. I guess it depends on the original agreement signed, but I was surprised to see that a movie doesn't even have to be released or even begin production in order to maintain rights; just enough activity with the property involved to keep them. I wish I could remember what movie was in the story I read. It may have been discussing the Lord of the Rings and how Peter Jackson was able to get his hands on it.
Maybe someone with more knowledge of the movie industry could clarify this or correct me if I'm wrong.
It was, in fact, the very same property. Quite a few years ago, the studio that held the rights to Fantastic Four previously decided that they weren't really going to use it and wanted to sell the rights to someone else. Instead of letting the rights revert to Marvel, they quickly threw together a low-budget film film and sold it on threat of it actually being released. Essentially, the thinking at a time was having an unsuccessful film belonging to a given property would make that property completely unusable for a decade or more. Some folks dispute this story, but it appears to be the case. The rights were sold and we got the movie that we got.
Thanks to the second Hulk movie showing that you can reboot a right after a failed movie and do just fine, that is no longer a difficulty, so now we have this potential mess to contend with--and 5 million other superhero film reboots.
More info about the unreleased film
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fantastic_Four_(film)
It was available on youtube at one point, and may still be there.
"EW reached out to Mara's rep for clarification on the quotes. The House of Cards vet says that she actually told Esquire Latin America's reporter that the film is not based on one comic, but rather drawn from the entire canon."
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/07/16/kate-maras-fanatastic-four/ (http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/07/16/kate-maras-fanatastic-four/)
So something has been lost in the translation or the interview given to Esquire Latin America, which is a Spanish language magazine.
I doubt Josh Trank or any filmmaker working on a comic book film nowadays is going to "throw everything about the comics out the window" and risk not getting fans on board. This is just a load of hyperbolic reporting from comic news sites trying to whip fans into a frenzy.
I don't think this is anything to get worked up about.
Quote
The actress for Sue Storm asked if she should read any of the comics to get caught up and the director told her "don't bother."
To put things into a little perspective here, Chris Pratt was told something similar by director James Gunn for Guardians of the Galaxy. That said the context of Pratt's quote was that the director and Marvel wanted him to concentrate on the script which is inspired by but different from the comics, learn his his version of Starlord. It doesn't sound like things are quite the same with FF.
Marvel/Disney actually had a chance to get FF back, just before this current film was getting under way. This did happen with Daredevil and Blade but Fox rushed this FF movie to production to maintain the rights (at least that's what I remember reading). So I think Marvel/Disney getting FF back is quite possible, especially if this film tanks.
X-Men is a completely different story. That's a successful franchise for Fox and there's little reason for them to ever give it up. And to be honest I like most of the X-Men movies so it's not a big deal to me if Fox keeps them. It would be nice if they could play nice and get Jackman into an Avengers movie though.
I haven't heard anything yet about this FF movie to make me interested, but I'd like to see a trailer before I really condemn it.
Right Cat, a crazy story, that one. Ohh Roger Corman, you are a piece of work. Anyway, you can actually find the entire film on Youtube. Here's the trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcpmM-eTESI
This movie is a good illustration that faithfulness to the source material, while a good thing, is not all you need to make a successful comic book film. ;)
Pod, I think you're right about the FF history here, but like I said, it seems unlikely that they'd give up the rights anytime soon. I do really wish Disney could snag them, though. I'd love to see a really awesome FF trilogy built on the classic stories, culminating in a really well-done Galactus. How amazing would that be?
I agree about the X-Men movies; they've been mostly good, but at the same time, I do wish that they could go back to Marvel and have a blank slate approach with more willingness to let the comics show through. I'm a bit torn about that, both wanting to see more of what Fox has done and wanting see something new. For my part, I actually don't want to see Wolverine in an Avengers movie. I've never really liked it when my Marvel super-teams bleed into one another. :P
Good, Fantastic Four are really lame in the comics. I'd like to see what this new movie has to offer.
Quote from: BWPS on July 17, 2014, 12:31:34 AM
Good, Fantastic Four are really lame in the comics. I'd like to see what this new movie has to offer.
Personally, I think they're alright, but your sentiment isn't an uncommon one. While I like the Fantastic Four as they are, I also know there's a decent amount of people who think that the FF just aren't relevant anymore, and that they need a serious revamp for today's day and age. I don't agree, seeing as Captain America, of all people, seems to work just fine and dandy these days, among other characters created decades ago. Still, I'd be interested to see just what a modern attempt to make FF more 'relevant' would be.
You know what? Hearing this, I just might have less of a problem with a Black Johnny Storm. I mean if this movie is to PURPOSELY have very little to do with the comic, then can I really be bothered by another mixed family on film?
I'm still not going to waste my money seeing it. But I hope for the best for Mara and Jordan and company.
Quote from: BWPS on July 17, 2014, 12:31:34 AM
Good, Fantastic Four are really lame in the comics. I'd like to see what this new movie has to offer.
I keep hearing stuff like that, and I call BS. People say that they don't want another FF film, that the property is outdated... but I just roll my eyes and point to "The Incredibles". That film is a far better embodiment of the Fantastic Four than any of the actual Fantastic Four films, and it's one of the most beloved Pixar films to this day. Even the original FF movie (which was more in keeping with the comics than the galactacloud in the sequel) wasn't "bad" just... eh.
Great points, 'Mato. I've read a good portion of the Marvel Adventures: Fantastic Four book from some years back, and found it, on the whole (though there were certainly weak points), a really excellent distillation of everything that made the FF great, fitting in fine with the modern day. They told great stories with a lot of heart and a great sense of joie de vivre! In fact, one of my favorite FF stories of all time is from that run. Clearly, you can tell good FF stories these days, it's just a matter of getting to the core of what makes the characters work, and that is the wonder of their world mixed with the mundane of their domestic life...surprisingly enough, that is just what we saw from The Incredibles. ^_^
Except that movie is nothing like the FF except that there's for of them.
Quote from: BWPS on July 17, 2014, 11:14:18 AM
Except that movie is nothing like the FF except that there's for of them.
You're right; it's nothing like the FF expect that there's for (four) of them. Oh, and that one character is middle-aged with superstrength, another has stretchy powers, another can turn invisible and make force-fields, and another, while not able to set things on fire, is still a blond hothead. Nothing similar about that. ;)
The Incredibles wasn't a blatant copy of the FF, but it still got the heart and soul of it down. The FF is a family, first and foremost, though that's not always apparent with all the cosmic adventuring that the FF tends to do. The Incredibles strips that away and gets right to the heart of the matter, while still providing some fine superhero action. Honestly, I have to wonder if you've read that much FF...
I haven't read a ton of Fantastic Fore, but I've given it a shot and while the powers have some similarities, the characters and family dynamics do not. My time is too valuable to me to spend arguing about how FF is completely different from and worse than the incredibles when it's not going to sway your opinion nor would I have any reason to want it to, so I'll just stop here. I'm glad they're doing an original take on the characters, I hope it's good.
BWPS, if you're going to troll, put more effort into it. If you can't even be bothered to spell "Four" right, no one's going to take you seriously.
I have two questions or something to think about:
1 - If this movie will have nothing to do with the FF comic and they won't even be call the Fantastic Four, would this void the deal/ contract that Fox has with Marvel? Could Marvel just say that Fox is making a movie with character similar to our? It's a long shot, but still......
2 - Do you think Fox is doing this because of the way Marvel treated them with X-men: DOFP?
Maybe my definition of "trolling" is different than most but I didn't think BWPS's comments were inflammatory or attempting to derail the discussion because he was responding to your comment while spelling "Four" wrong.
So he spelled Four wrong. No big deal.
I gotta wonder how much the producers know what fan reaction is going to be. They give wholesale changes to characters but keep the title and names, making it unrecognizable yet still calling it FANTASTIC FOUR. Even IF the actors and director put forth a good effort, it IS possible that a good movie not well received.
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on July 17, 2014, 05:16:19 PM
So he spelled Four wrong. No big deal.
Spelling four wrong once is one thing. Spelling it wrong twice comes close to being deliberate.
Quote from: kkhohoho on July 17, 2014, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on July 17, 2014, 05:16:19 PM
So he spelled Four wrong. No big deal.
Spelling four wrong once is one thing. Spelling it wrong twice comes close to being deliberate.
At least I didn't spell it wrong phore times.
Quote from: BWPS on July 17, 2014, 06:44:08 PM
Quote from: kkhohoho on July 17, 2014, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on July 17, 2014, 05:16:19 PM
So he spelled Four wrong. No big deal.
Spelling four wrong once is one thing. Spelling it wrong twice comes close to being deliberate.
At least I didn't spell it wrong phore times.
Ohh! :P
Personally, I think that post was in phoor taste
*SIGH* :doh: Can we please keep it moving?
Quote from: JeyNyce on July 17, 2014, 05:00:33 PM
I have two questions or something to think about:
1 - If this movie will have nothing to do with the FF comic and they won't even be call the Fantastic Four, would this void the deal/ contract that Fox has with Marvel? Could Marvel just say that Fox is making a movie with character similar to our? It's a long shot, but still......
If the initial quote from Ultimate Evil is any indication, "The actress for
Sue Storm asked.....," they still may be using the same characters. If this is the case, it doesn't matter what they name the movie, as the rights to the characters were sold as well.
Quote from: BWPS on July 17, 2014, 06:44:08 PM
Quote from: kkhohoho on July 17, 2014, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on July 17, 2014, 05:16:19 PM
So he spelled Four wrong. No big deal.
Spelling four wrong once is one thing. Spelling it wrong twice comes close to being deliberate.
At least I didn't spell it wrong phore times.
On the real though, my first TWO thoughts reading this were:
1. What in the world is wrong with this dude's spell-checker?
2. If it's not working on his phone, then he should use his computer to post.
It took me a whole 4 seconds to get it.
(http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/ignore_jpg_scale_super/11111/111111372/3987325-5116100402-get)
Thoughts on the leaked Thing?
I think that looks awesome.
He looks really good to me.
I don't know what to expect from this movie. I'll have to see a trailer before I can make any kind of strong judgment. Not really a big FF fan, but it would be impressive to see a FF movie that gets it right. I really liked the Incredibles, and I can see why it gets compared to Fantastic Four.
I really don't get most complaints about it.
Yeah sure, Michael B Jordan is Human Torch, a black guy plays a white guy oooh controversy.
What I really don't understand is the complaints of them being acted like disabled people, I read some Ultimate FF, Ben there really showed his, for the lack of a better word at the moment, dissapointment, they never really did decided to become heroes at the get go, other than Johnny, they were really fearing on public perception of them, especially Ben.
About the no costumes, yeah..... They're obviously just gonna go over some of the Ultimate Fantastic Four elements, like having no costumes until much much later until the Public accepts them
He looks good.
Yeah, I'm another person who has no problem separating comics from movies, and I have always WANTED to like Fantastic Four but at least growing up I was more intersted in X-Men (metaphor for civil rights) and later Avengers (metaphor for international policy) but I'm just now getting around to appreciate Fantastic Four (incredible 'what if' sci-fi scenarios).
So a movie that is just really far out there and creative, I dont care how far it strays from the comic, so long as it is exciting. The last two movies only succeeded in being less serious than other comic movies, but that was basically it.
See, I personally don't care about the change to Human Torch's ethnicity that much (Ironically, it's mainly my black friends who I hear complain about it) but what's got people so concerned is that everyone keep's saying that the tone is darker and more realistic. The last time we heard that, it was in relation to Man of Steel... and that tone really doesn't fit the character. With Fantastic Four, it's even worse... "dark" and "realistic" is so contrary to what makes the Fantastic Four interesting and different that I'm actually more pessimistic about this film than about BvS.
Quote from: lugaru on July 28, 2014, 04:20:54 PM
Yeah, I'm another person who has no problem separating comics from movies, and I have always WANTED to like Fantastic Four but at least growing up I was more intersted in X-Men (metaphor for civil rights) and later Avengers (metaphor for international policy) but I'm just now getting around to appreciate Fantastic Four (incredible 'what if' sci-fi scenarios).
So a movie that is just really far out there and creative, I dont care how far it strays from the comic, so long as it is exciting. The last two movies only succeeded in being less serious than other comic movies, but that was basically it.
I've said it before, and I will probably say it again, but if you want to make a movie about "X," which has nothing in common with the property you're supposed to be adapting, then go ahead and make that movie about "X," just don't take up space that should be used for something else. I don't mind adaptations, and I don't mind innovation, but this sounds like neither.
Yeah, as somebody who is a huge movie nerd I am fascinated by the line between adaptation and... what's a good term? Scavenging comes to mind... grabbing tiny bits and most importantly the 'name' which brings some fans with it.
Constantine is a perfect example of a movie that just raids rather than adapts, in that it has almost nothing to do with the comic. Same goes for Jonah Hex. Spider-Man is a great example of an adaptation, it is in fact very close except say the Green Goblin's look and Spidey's organic web's (which is debatable but I like a lot). The ending of Watchmen is another great example... it divorses itself from the 'I stole this from Twilight Zone" ending and uses something that more neately ties the plot together (blaming Dr. Manhattan... spoilers!).
At some point you need to choose "am I throwing away what is good?" or "am I smoothing over what only makes sense in the comics?". Like the Christopher Nolan Batman movies are very liberal on 'grounding' characters, while something like the movie Catwoman says 'I'm going to go in my own weird direction' and well fails because it discards 'the good' to just tell a different story entirely.
In the case of the Fantastic 4, I do hope you have an aloof and distracted scientist, a grounded 'mother' figure, a hot headed showoff and a big brute with a heart of gold. If they sell that out to adapt it, that would be really a huge loss. The 'realistic' comments do make me fear that we may never see outer space or the negative zone or some alternate dimension, but instead we will get 'yet another' battle in downtown New York.
Lu, that's all well phrased, and you have some good examples of effective adaptations. I'd also point to the Asgardians as aliens and the like. We have a plethora of good examples at this point. You're right. There's plenty of room for adaptation to make a concept work better or to tell a really interesting story, but when you go too far afield, discard too much, you lose the reason for doing an adaptation in the first place. All of this goes back to a point I've oft repeated, these characters and concepts have survived for half a century, and there's a reason for that. There are worthwhile elements to them that resonate with audiences, no matter what.
I'd argue that the broad archetypal character descriptions you provide are not the only necessary elements to bring the F4 to life (though I realize you were not really attempting to be exhaustive). I'd say there is also that element of fantastic exploration and adventure that is native to the concept, and, as you put it, 'yet another battle in downtown New York,' wouldn't really do that justice. I'm sure it's possible for these folks to turn out something good, but nothing I've heard so far gives me any confidence in that.
That "leaked" picture of The Thing looks great, IMO.
The Thing photo reminds me of the art from this series:
Spoiler
(http://www.zoom-comics.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/36/2008/11/fantastic-four-and-x-men-500x407.jpg)
I like it, though. I'm optimistic about the direction they're taking this in so far. The previous F4 movies were way too goofy and underwhelming.
I actually... liked them.
Overall... for the most part... well, it wasn't all bad. Yeah they made a mockery of Galactus, depowered the Silver Surfer, gave Doctor Doom some different powers, had him sound unthreatening, and hardly wanted to take itself seriously even if it wanted to despite the writing being rather lazy at times. But I actually think the Four were written and performed very well. I think they did a great job showing the four of them, their problems and personalities. Also thought they did a good job explaining their original, modernizing it and also making it make sense as well. And I was really pleased to see the Silver Surfer on the big screen...
Okay fine, they were goofy and underwhelming. But that's not always a bad thing in the scheme of things.
There have certainly been worse superhero movies. If it wasn't for the crime against literature that their misuse of the Galactus story was, I'd feel much more positve about them.
The previous Fantastic Four films just weren't very good films, period. I didn't mind the changes they made to Dr Doom, Galactus, Silver Surfer, etc, but there were some serious pacing issues (the climactic fight with Doom feels like its over in seconds), weak comedy and boring characterisation for the Four (aside from Johnny). They also did a poor job of making The Thing look formidable.
If you put the first Tim Story Fantastic Four film next to Bryan Singer's first X-Men film or Sam Raimi's Spiderman, by comparison it looks like the work of a director with limited skill and imagination, and has aged the most badly. If I hadn't been trapped in my seat on an international flight, I never would have gotten through Fantastic Four: Rise of The Silver Surfer ... awful stuff.
Josh Trank may only have one film to his name, but that single film is better than Tim Story's entire filmography.
Quote from: JeyNyce on July 17, 2014, 05:00:33 PM
1 - If this movie will have nothing to do with the FF comic and they won't even be call the Fantastic Four, would this void the deal/ contract that Fox has with Marvel? Could Marvel just say that Fox is making a movie with character similar to our? It's a long shot, but still......
QuoteIf the initial quote from Ultimate Evil is any indication, "The actress for Sue Storm asked.....," they still may be using the same characters. If this is the case, it doesn't matter what they name the movie, as the rights to the characters were sold as well.
I think it's a risky move by Fox. I'm obviously not privy to the terms of the licensing deal, but if they change the characters too much and forego making a "Fantastic Four" movie I would think that Marvel could argue that Fox has indeed not fulfilled the terms of the contract. If the rights to the FF revert, it wouldn't matter if Fox got to keep the characters. They could pretty effectively keep each other from making any FF movies, and the end result would be that the rights go back to Marvel.
Now, making one or more of the characters black, hispanic, or whatever probably doesn't constitute 'too much change'. Making one or more characters a different ethnicity and changing their appearance, background, or powers in any substantial way is entirely different. You can't just slap the same name on them and claim it's the same character. That would probably even open up the door to a trademark/copyright infringement suit.
I will say that making Sue Storm white and Johnny Storm black is an odd choice, to the point of being a complete disconnect. In the comics, their strong physical resemblance (both blonde, etc) served to highlight the contrast between their very different personalities. You take that resemblance away and the irony is gone. Aside from that, the story and the actors will have to work that much harder to get the audience to buy them as brother and sister... which is time away from all of the other plot development they ought to be doing.
The previous Fox movies got the chemistry right, even if some other things were off. If they get the chemistry wrong because they're changing the wrong stuff, it's just a fail. A spectacular one, I hope.
I wish I could say that the FF are better off with Marvel in the long run. But I hear what they're doing with their comics and I have to wonder if that's really true. Certainly the movies are doing extremely well and are essentially true to the characters. But the long run? I dunno.
Quote from: BlueBard on August 07, 2014, 02:07:41 PMI think it's a risky move by Fox. I'm obviously not privy to the terms of the licensing deal, but if they change the characters too much and forego making a "Fantastic Four" movie I would think that Marvel could argue that Fox has indeed not fulfilled the terms of the contract. If the rights to the FF revert, it wouldn't matter if Fox got to keep the characters. They could pretty effectively keep each other from making any FF movies, and the end result would be that the rights go back to Marvel.
I doubt there's anything in the contract that says "You must be this % faithful to the comics or else". I'm sure we've all seen adaptations that bore little resemblance to the source material. My favorite was the SyFy Channel's adaptation of Philip Jose Farmer's "Riverworld" novels: They only used two or three characters from the books, turned the main hero into a villain, and replaced everyone else with new characters they made up. Needless to say, there wasn't much of Farmer's story left when they were done.
Quote from: JKCarrier on August 07, 2014, 02:29:42 PM
Quote from: BlueBard on August 07, 2014, 02:07:41 PMI think it's a risky move by Fox. I'm obviously not privy to the terms of the licensing deal, but if they change the characters too much and forego making a "Fantastic Four" movie I would think that Marvel could argue that Fox has indeed not fulfilled the terms of the contract. If the rights to the FF revert, it wouldn't matter if Fox got to keep the characters. They could pretty effectively keep each other from making any FF movies, and the end result would be that the rights go back to Marvel.
I doubt there's anything in the contract that says "You must be this % faithful to the comics or else". I'm sure we've all seen adaptations that bore little resemblance to the source material. My favorite was the SyFy Channel's adaptation of Philip Jose Farmer's "Riverworld" novels: They only used two or three characters from the books, turned the main hero into a villain, and replaced everyone else with new characters they made up. Needless to say, there wasn't much of Farmer's story left when they were done.
But there is one vital difference. Marvel has gone to the trouble of registering all of these characters as trademarks. Marvel may have enough standing to argue that their trademarks are being infringed if Fox tampers with them too much.
Obviously, that assumes that Marvel cares enough to go that route, which I doubt. I assume they would like the movie rights back, but not enough to file a risky lawsuit over it. Depends how much money is on the table and how much damage they feel Fox is doing to their IP.
The question of when a character is no longer identifiable as the source material and is in fact something new is going to be sticky.
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on July 30, 2014, 05:14:26 AM
I actually... liked them.
Overall... for the most part... well, it wasn't all bad. Yeah they made a mockery of Galactus, depowered the Silver Surfer, gave Doctor Doom some different powers, had him sound unthreatening, and hardly wanted to take itself seriously even if it wanted to despite the writing being rather lazy at times. But I actually think the Four were written and performed very well. I think they did a great job showing the four of them, their problems and personalities. Also thought they did a good job explaining their original, modernizing it and also making it make sense as well. And I was really pleased to see the Silver Surfer on the big screen...
Okay fine, they were goofy and underwhelming. But that's not always a bad thing in the scheme of things.
I didn't hate the first one. It wasn't great, but it was at least a little entertaining. I have no real desire to see it again. The second one I actually quite enjoyed. Yes, it has flaws, and Galactus wasn't very satisfying (though I strongly disagree with the outrage over him being a cloud) but I really liked the Silver Surfer in it (though yes, he was a lot less powerful). Whatever else you could say about the cast (Doom was particularly miscast, and Alba was a poor Sue) Micheal Chiklis was a
perfect Ben Grimm (though I didn't like that they went with the "clay" design for him. If he looked like the image in this thread, he really would be perfect). I'm not sure there's ever been a better cast Thing in any medium (something I probably cannot say about any other superhero characters except Samuel L and Downy). It also get a plus for lifting one of the all time great speeches from the Ultimate comics (though to be fair, that speech was said to Nick Fury himself in the comics).
As for the new one I really don't know until I see at least a trailer, (though that Thing prop seriously looks really good), but I don't have confidence in it. They seem to be giving off a grimdark/"Nolanesque" vibe and that's the exact opposite of what a proper Fantastic Four film should be. I seriously expect the trailer to start with "BWAAAM" something that should never,
ever be associated with an FF movie.
http://screenrant.com/fantastic-four-reboot-dr-doom-costume-photo/
You can read what the link says it is, but to be fair there's a lot of CGI to be put in... and it COULD be a Doombot.
Just think happy thoughts when you view it.
At least they have the mask, cape, and hood. :P
Well, that's par for the course.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-BVs-KCSiA&feature=youtu.be
On the bright side, it looks better than Corman's version.
tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/TheFantasticFour
There was also this,not hard to top that?
Why so serious? It looks like a serious drama movie.
At least it looks interesting, unlike the "serious" Ant-Man teaser. This looks like a sci-fi movie with some pretty visuals.
I'm looking forward to this one.
Yeah, it is more interesting than the Ant-Man trailer, but that's not hard, Ant-Man's trailer was pretty underwhelming (I still want to see it in theaters though; this I wouldn't bother with).
New FF looks about what I expected. Not bad on its own merits, pretty darn good actually, but it also looks and sounds like every other movie out there now, and is the complete tonal opposite of pretty much every other iteration of FF since, like, ever.
I'm still waiting for an explanation for why Johnny's black and Sue's white though.
Also, from now on, every movie studio that does a super hero reboot and uses the same villains as last time gets hit on the head with a rolled-up newspaper. Even the new Spidey movies gave us new villains.
I'm with you on this one, Silver Shocker. All movies these days, and certainly those of the superhero genre, seem to come in trilogies. Why not wait to have the FF take on Doom? As powerful as he is, he's also always been a behind the scenes schemer and that would fit into him having a presence in all of the movies involved. I, for one, would absolutely love to see a little call back to the original FF and have them take on the Mole Man. With all of the subterranean nightmares he lords over, it would be a great showcase for some awesome CGI monsters.
How many FF villains does Fox has the rights to? That could be the reason why they're using Doom so much. Like it was said before, I would have kept Doom in the background and let the FF fight someone like Mole Man or the Skulls (if they have the rights to them)
I THINK they've got rights to all purely FF villains.
Does Annihilus count? Because he would be awesome. Though on the other hand, I would rather Marvel Studios have him and do a loose adaptation of Annihilation with the Guardians. THAT would be awesome.
Yeah, save him for a more promising and faithful franchise.
I'll just drop this down right here, for ya.
https://pmchollywoodlife.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/drdoom-movie-pics-lead.jpg?w=1200 (https://pmchollywoodlife.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/drdoom-movie-pics-lead.jpg?w=1200)
I bet the green screen pic is Doom before he becomes Doom on the alternate world or whatever.