Fantastic Four

[LotsoA113]

Yeah, this was a mess of a movie. Real shame; it started out decently, with some good chemistry between the actors and some interesting character moments. But oh man, the moment they get their powers this whole movie just goes down the drain and its a non-stop slog of sloppy visual effects, terrible dialogue (everything Reed Richards says in the second half of this movie is poorly delivered it just boggles the mind) and one of the worst climaxes I've seen in a summer blockbuster in some time.

It's not quite Pixels bad, but it's not far off!

[Dacey]

You see, I still wanna see Pixels. Looks like great fun to me, and the special effects seem fantastic.

And that's a darn shame about Reed Richards considering how incredible Miles Teller was in Whiplash! But he himself may not be to blame.

[James]

I actually though Pixels was a lot of fun. It didn't try to be anything more than that.

[EricJ]

As for the comment on the Shaun thread:

I'm hoping that the new Mission: Impossible manages to win the weekend over Fantfourstic. Now THERE'S a summer action movie.

MI has gotten some surprise good reviews, but in the bigger picture, we don't want Fox having anyone more plausible to blame if Fantastic doesn't make it to #1.

It wouldn't have quite the bold, crushing impact of pants-down public humiliation that Sony suffered with ASM2, and eventually convinced them to start making peace with Marvel. (As one critic was honest enough to point out.)
Getting through to Fox will be much tougher, especially now that they have Bryan Singer's X-movies to cling to as a teddy bear.

(That said, even Fox's Deadpool movie looked better than Fantastic, and that's from one who couldn't stand the character or the R-rated trailer.)

[Ben]

Ah, brings back memories of Sesevenven...

[gaastra]

FF bombs on Friday. It's dead jim.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/ ... /?a=123735

Also fox stopped filming of three action scenes to save a buck! That's why there is not much action in this movie!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNUrwtNH_aE

[Randall]

I do hate that. From the same brilliant minds that gave us the LXG movie! If you can't remember what that was supposed to stand for, my point is doubly made.

I really hoped the bad buzz was overblown. Sadly, not the case. It's a shame. I thought the trailer showed potential.

[Ben]

I can...and I actually really like that movie, for what it is (and I know what it isn't), but it's a fun ride and just old-school enjoyable.

Sounds like FF just went through too painful a creation, from a studio imposing budget cuts because they didn't fully believe, to a director who went off the rails and was probably fighting with them over those cuts, to producers who came in late to try and salvage the thing but quite obviously failed. A Frankenstein's creature if ever there was one, and that's never usually a good sign, especially when not even one of the three main forces (studio, director, producer) doesn't seem to have ever gotten a proper handle on things.

Time to let the FF return to Marvel. Despite that I quite liked the first film, and even the second was kind of fun despite it being a Silver Surfer setup that never came (and Alba just looking like some weird CGI mo-cap character in the amount of makeup caked on her), Fox have never really "got" the FF and, unlike X-Men, they didn't ever really have a champion to run with it.

Hopefully the rumors of an X-Men TV show might be true, which Fox can't proceed with because they only have movie rights. A little pressure from Marvel to make the show for them (as DC does for Gotham) could have them exchanging the FF rights back in return. It's happened before and could be the answer here...

[James]

I like the older two as well. At the very least they got the "tone" right for FF.

And if Marvel were to get those rights back anytime soon, hopefully they would put off doing anything with them until after the current movies into 2020 are done!

[EricJ]

I can...and I actually really like that movie, for what it is (and I know what it isn't), but it's a fun ride and just old-school enjoyable.

(Assuming you mean LXG: )
One article on "overlooked" movies mentioned, "Okay, let's assume for the moment you're NOT a diehard comics-reading Alan Moore fanboy who's outraged at any single change to the print story..."
Moore is usually too snotty, gay-pissy, misogynistic, discontentedly sacred-cow-hunting artsy and anarchy-in-the-UK to be translated directly to the screen, otherwise Watchmen would have done a lot better in the theaters. V For Vendetta at least found some common mainstream-movie ground (although we know why the Wachowskis liked it... ), and it emphasizes that a comic movie is not a comic book, although the good ones, like Disney-Marvel, can be both.
There were a lot of things wrong with LXG (bitter old pre-retirement Connery topping the list), but "Hyde didn't sodomize anybody!" or "You can't drive cars in Venice!" were not among them.

I like the older two as well. At the very least they got the "tone" right for FF.
And if Marvel were to get those rights back anytime soon, hopefully they would put off doing anything with them until after the current movies into 2020 are done!

Again, the only reason we got this aberration was likely due to some legal rights over the producers of the first two movies, which means that Trank "had" to use the new Ultimate print-canon, like Sony using Ultimate Spiderman when they made the Amazing movies without Raimi.
And for everything bad the first two movies did, at least they did get the tone right (when they weren't trying to be a bad sitcom, and Green Lantern their way out of it)--As insufferable as Chris Evans' Johnny Storm was, that was the comic character, and Michael Chiklis WAS the Thing, even with low-tech effects.

The second movie even tried to "apologize" for the first movie's Doom, and wrote in a plot excuse for him to go back to wearing a mask again.
And to think, all we complained about back then was that Galactus was only a big storm...It seemed like such a big deal at the time.

[Dacey]

Big fan of the first two myself (as I'm sure I stated years ago in this thread). If there's anything "good" that's come from this new movie, at least people are now saying nice things about those films again.

But I'm not sure how much we can believe Trank on this, if at all. He's lied a lot to the press (couldn't go to SWC because of the "worst flu of his life," said that FF would be done in 2D because "that's the may it intended to be seen" even though they shot it with 3D in mind!), and this just sounds like Bryan Singer talking about the Superman Returns sequel that never happened. "It would've had a lot of action! It would've been so epic!" Not buying it there, and not buying it from Trank, either.

And, yeah, Alan Moore is kinda a huge hypocritical jerk when it comes to adaptations (to the point where he took his credit off of Watchmen, which was insane since Zack Snyder was clearly an incredibly genuine fan who provided the probably the most faithful comic book adaptation of all time), but LXG is stupid for reasons that don't have to do with them changing the material (the Mr. Hyde CGI is some of the most laughable I've seen in a big budget release, and I say that as someone who actually really loves Van Helsing). Granted, it's enjoyably stupid, but still stupid. Watchmen I adored despite wishing it was a bit more action-heavy, and V For Vendetta was also a solid film overall (but also could've stood more in the fights department).

[Dan]

I liked Tim Story's Fantastic Four films as it was clear he and his crew were trying to capture the more fun and enjoyable aspects of the stories. While the films could hardly be seen as being great comic book films, they were nonetheless films that were decent enough that it didn't really harm anyone or anything. I just felt that Jessica Alba seemed a little young to play Sue (and she was running parallel with playing Nancy in Sin City).

While I doubt I might ever see this Fantastic Four, I don't think it really borrows that much from the Ultimate universe (same with my not believing the Amazing Spider-Man films borrowing from the Ultimate Spider-Man books because the Ultimate Spider-Man books were fun and the Amazing films were gloomy and angst-ridden). But that's just based on analysis of the trailers, my understanding of the film's story, and my recollection of the Ultimate books.

The Alan Moore thing could be a whole thread unto itself. The issue of his removing his credit I think stems more from Fox getting sued by some guy claiming LXG was plagiarism of his own thing, Moore having to go through a tedious deposition, and then learning that Fox settled. I understand that was what really peeved him the most.

[ShyViolet]

Big fan of the first two myself (as I'm sure I stated years ago in this thread). If there's anything "good" that's come from this new movie, at least people are now saying nice things about those films again.

I liked the first two as well. (I actually own the first; although I did buy it when it was first released I haven't watched it since! LOL. ) Like everyone has said the older films were "fun" and at least had some sense of humor too. (Plus even with being a "geek", Reed Richards was HOOOOTTTT!!!)

Also, this was a hilarious abridged script of the first FF film from well, exactly ten years ago!

Warning: Some language

http://www.the-editing-room.com/fantastic4.html

[ShyViolet]

Clip of 2005 film's climax: (posted by FHEFoxConnect)

[James]

Trailer for the 1994 version: