Fantastic Four

Post by **ShyViolet** » November 27th, 2006, 10:27 pm

Doesn't Thing look just like the creature in Enemy Mine?

Post by **Ben** » November 27th, 2006, 11:41 pm

I actually have the poster for this and a much earlier version of Spider-Man (even before Jim Cameron was attached, from 1986 I think) around here somewhere.

I never saw the film, but it looks and sounds quite actually like a lot of fun!

And...I think they got The Thing looking pretty darn good for the time and budget. Although I'm glad they didn't go CGI in the new one, his size wasn't anywhere as near as big as it should have been and you'd think that 10+ years on they would have solved it more than <I>just</I> a guy in another suit.

Post by **ShyViolet** » November 27th, 2006, 11:44 pm

Yeah, good point. Why didn't they use makeup FX or something, like in The Klumps movie or Dick Tracy??

Post by **Dacey** » November 28th, 2006, 9:59 am

From what I've heard, the Thing will be "Bigger" in the sequel. They've made a new costume for him.

And, yeah, of course I've heard about the "Bad" FF film. Someday I'd like to see it, if only to find out what it's like.

Also, wasn't it made just so Fox could preserve the copyrights or something?

Post by **ShyViolet** » November 28th, 2006, 1:18 pm

They've made a new costume for him.

Yeah but it's still just another costume. How great can it be?

Post by **Meg** » November 28th, 2006, 2:48 pm

What, you'd rather he just be a big CGI special effect the whole movie?

I actually prefer the suit. Old-school SFX can be more effective than CG in some cases...Although yes, it was a bit small.

Post by **Dacey** » November 28th, 2006, 4:19 pm

Well, CGI characters can quite often work.

And, as "Dead Man's Chest" showed us, they're just getting better and better.

My guess is they might make him digital in the third one, depending on how much money Part II makes.

Post by **Ben** » November 28th, 2006, 9:10 pm

My feeling is that they stick to the suit...it works and is a practical element for the actors to use on set.

But then enlrage him the way they did Hagrid. Robbie Coltrane is nowhere near that big, and they could do the same for Chiklis - a few extra feet on him would have made the world of difference.

But they can't do it now as they'd have to come up with some really phony "geeting larger" exposition - lameo!

Post by **ShyViolet** » November 29th, 2006, 2:58 pm

I actually prefer the suit. Old-school SFX can be more effective than CG in some cases...Although yes, it was a bit small.

I agree with you about old-school SFX Meg--I just meant that maybe they coud do a suit- meets-makeup kind of thing. Like Eddie Murphy in The Nutty Professor or Mike Meyers as Fat Bastard. (pardon my language

) Both of those won the Oscar too!

Well, CGI characters can quite often work.

Not always...remember The Hulk? (I once heard someone say that he looks like Shrek!)

Post by **ShyViolet** » November 29th, 2006, 11:35 pm

But they can't do it now as they'd have to come up with some really phony "geeting larger" exposition - lameo!

If I were them, I'd just pretend he always looked like that.

Post by **Dacey** » November 30th, 2006, 11:02 am

You'd never get away with it if you did!

Some people ALWAYS notice stuff like that.

Anyway, here's your first look at the Fantasticar (notice how the Thing isn't in the pic):

http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/new ... icar_x.htm

Post by **Ben** » November 30th, 2006, 2:30 pm

That doesn't look as bad as it sounds, actually.

Post by **Meg** » November 30th, 2006, 2:39 pm

I wouldn't mind having one of those!

Post by **Dacey** » November 30th, 2006, 3:39 pm

It also splits apart. That sounds pretty cool.

Post by **Meg** » November 30th, 2006, 7:45 pm

Indeed!