so you want a fantastic 4 movie, well tough the director says no

[trebean]

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

[BentonGrey]

He looks good.

[lugaru]

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.

[Tomato]

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.

[BentonGrey]

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.

[lugaru]

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.

[BentonGrey]

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.

[Starman]

That "leaked" picture of The Thing looks great, IMO.

[Figure Fan]

The Thing photo reminds me of the art from this series:

Spoiler

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.

[Shogunn2517]

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.

[BentonGrey]

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.

[Starman]

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.

[BlueBard]

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.

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.

[JKCarrier]

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.

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.

[BlueBard]

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.

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.

[Silver Shocker]

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.

[Shogunn2517]

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.

[spydermann93]

At least they have the mask, cape, and hood.

[BentonGrey]

Well, that's par for the course.

[Shogunn2517]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-BVs-KCSiA&feature=youtu.be

On the bright side, it looks better than Corman's version.

[HarryTrotter]

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/TheFantasticFour

There was also this,not hard to top that?

[JeyNyce]

Why so serious?  It looks like a serious drama movie.

[Starman]

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.

[Silver Shocker]

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.

[hoss20]

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.

[JeyNyce]

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)

[BentonGrey]

I THINK they've got rights to all purely FF villains.

[Silver Shocker]

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.

[BentonGrey]

Yeah, save him for a more promising and faithful franchise.

[XStream]

I'll just drop this down right here, for ya.

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.