What I've seen in the trailers looks fine. The only other thing I've heard is the rumor about him being a blogger, and apparently that was a misunderstanding.
Fantastic Four reboot-- Casting, Rumors, Pix, ect;
- Thread starter Turtletrekker
- Start date
What I've seen in the trailers looks fine. The only other thing I've heard is the rumor about him being a blogger, and apparently that was a misunderstanding.
Well, if they'll buy Thanos...
This is from a video game and isn't a bad start at how it could work. [yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cg0YsGfCq7o[/yt]
Thanos is just a humanoid alien. That's not a problem. Galactus is supposed to be a fundamental cosmic force as old as the universe, and large and powerful enough to consume planets. Even the comics were sufficiently embarrassed by the original "big guy in a funny hat" design to retcon it as a perceptual illusion since humans can't comprehend the reality. But since movie adaptations are starting from scratch and free to reinvent, I think they could come up with something better. The swarm we got in Rise of the Silver Surfer wasn't great (though it's similar to the Gah Lak Tus swarm entity from Ultimate Fantastic Four), but there could be a better approach. My idea for a reimagined Galactus would be something like a sentient black hole ringed by vast Kirbyesque devices that would serve the role of the machine he used in the original FF story to feed on Earth, and that would have design elements in common with Galactus's appearance.
So non-comics audiences are going to be like, "I can dig this Thanos cat because he's an alien but that Galactus, what a pile of poo."?
The point is that a power-mad alien is a very different and much lesser category of entity than an embodiment of an eternal cosmic force, and thus it's a rather poor comparison.
Sure, maybe if you portrayed Galactus as the comics did, audiences would buy it in the way they'd buy Laurence Olivier as Zeus or Morgan Freeman as God. But that doesn't mean it's automatically the best or most creative way to portray it. Fans are too willing to cling blindly to very old ideas. The job of creators is to look for new ways of doing things, not just slavishly imitate the past.
Regarding faithfulness to the comics, the FF movies from a few years ago were more or less faithful to the comics, but I think a problem was that they were too faithful in all the worst ways. They seemed to make the "silly" aspects of the 60s comics all the more silly. I'm thinking of the poor scenes of doom riding the cosmic surfboard. It is something you can accept in a comic but didn't work on screen. I'm also thinking of Ben and Johnny switching bodies--it just came across as silly and childish rather than funny and amusing.
As for the new movie, it also seems to be a pretty faithful adaptation albeit to the Ultimate FF rather than the 616 version.'
As for the new movie, it also seems to be a pretty faithful adaptation albeit to the Ultimate FF rather than the 616 version.'
They switched powers, not bodies.
I think you need to get a life.
said the guy posting on a Star Trek message board...
Thanos is a titan born Eternal, who was raised from the dead by Marvel's embodiment of Death to have Thanos kill half of all life in the universe. To that end Thanos became more than either Galactus or Death. Galactus' appearance isn't an illusion, he's simply seen differently by each race that sees him, kinda like the Vorlons on Babylon 5. But he still can't be taken out by the Silver Surfer whch we saw in the last movie. If Galactus can be threatened by the ulitmate nullifer into leaving earth though he's not really much of a threat.
Seriously? You're really going to equate posting on a message board with wasting one's time calling for a boycott of a movie for absolutely no reason whatsoever?
In the words of Malcolm Reynolds, "My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle".
Well that's an original approach.
one could say posting on a message board is a waste of time.
So's watching TV, reading fiction, listening to music...
Plenty of reason - one is harmless bit of procrastination while actively campaigning for someone's creative work to fail (especially fluff like this) is something that likely needs talking through with a therapist or at least suggests some one is off their meds.