Fantastic Four reboot?
- Thread starter Norrin Radd
- Start date
Norrin Radd
Vice Admiral
Which is why the FF films are exactly how they are.
And Batman has the Batmobile and the Batarang and the Batcave and the Bat- god knows what else.
Many of Spider-Man's villains (for instance) are pretty damn lame...if they're written that way. I mean, the Green GOBLIN?That's his frickin' arch-enemy and yet apparently he looks so lame, they felt they had to change him for the movie. Unfortunately, they come up with something worse.
And a lot of married couples have pet names for each other...it disgusts me in real life.
They aren't really trying to be like Spidey or Bats and be real world believable, they remain true to the comics.
True to what era of comics? In the John Byrne era, Reed and Sue's unborn baby dies, Annihilus almost kills Franklin and Alicia, Reed and Sue are tormented in hell, the Thing is almost killed by Gladiator, Johnny sleeps with Alicia before she breaks up with Ben, Galactus kills billions, and Reed is almost executed. After Lee and Kirby, the Byrne era is considered the greatest of all. It wasn't camp and it wasn't fun and games.
It maybe but no cartoon version or film yet has acknowledged it. They all remain campy, which goes back to my original statement.Which is why the FF films are exactly how they are.And Batman has the Batmobile and the Batarang and the Batcave and the Bat- god knows what else.
Many of Spider-Man's villains (for instance) are pretty damn lame...if they're written that way. I mean, the Green GOBLIN?
And a lot of married couples have pet names for each other...it disgusts me in real life.
They aren't really trying to be like Spidey or Bats and be real world believable, they remain true to the comics.
True to what era of comics? In the John Byrne era, Reed and Sue's unborn baby dies, Annihilus almost kills Franklin and Alicia, Reed and Sue are tormented in hell, the Thing is almost killed by Gladiator, Johnny sleeps with Alicia before she breaks up with Ben, Galactus kills billions, and Reed is almost executed. After Lee and Kirby, the Byrne era is considered the greatest of all. It wasn't camp and it wasn't fun and games.
I think IMO we forget that most superhero comics are meant for all ages. Young children too, not just the PG-13 and over crowd. It tough explaining to a young child why he can't see a modern Batman film because it's too mature for them.
Norrin Radd
Vice Admiral
So now we're taking our cues from subpar films and children's cartoons? I'd better brush up on Challenge of the Super Friends again...
It's was part of the statement in my first post, I haven't changed anything I've said.
The 90's FF cartoon contained two of the grimmer storylines from the books, including Sue's torture and subjugation by Psycho-Man, and the murder of Franklin Storm by the Skrulls, both of which led to vengeance quests on the part of our heroes.
Norrin Radd
Vice Admiral
When you take the totality of FF media, what's more prominent and what's been around for a longer period of time...the books or the TV shows/movies? I mean, if we're going strictly by live media, there's been more campy Adam West-type Batman than serious Christopher Nolan-type Batman. So which is right?
The comparison to Iron Man is interesting; Iron Man was far funnier than either of the FF movies, it was just smarter about it, compared to those films' stupid humour, and it had real weight as well.
The films disrupt the basic dynamic of the group by equalizing their ages; Reed is meant to be 40+, a real father figure to the immature Johnny, rather than a peer, for example.
The biggest sin of those movies was their indistinctness. The Four live in the higher-end of the Marvel Universe; it should be a crazily inventive, high-tech place (indeed, since there's no need to rein in that sort of thing in order to accommodate books like Daredevil, you can have Reed's genius really change the world).
The films disrupt the basic dynamic of the group by equalizing their ages; Reed is meant to be 40+, a real father figure to the immature Johnny, rather than a peer, for example.
The biggest sin of those movies was their indistinctness. The Four live in the higher-end of the Marvel Universe; it should be a crazily inventive, high-tech place (indeed, since there's no need to rein in that sort of thing in order to accommodate books like Daredevil, you can have Reed's genius really change the world).
Seriously with all due respect, you're asking me as if it was my choice to make these adaptions of the FF this way. It's not up too me what's right, it's up to Marvel & at the time the studios they associated with. Question them on why every version of the FF to date has been portrayed this way.
I quite enjoyed the first movie, probably because my expectations had been lowered by reviews and word of mouth. It was no Batman Begins or Spider-man 2, but had it come out 10 years or so ago, it would have been very well received. Chiklis and Evans were perfect casting and it did get the tone of the comic series pretty well. The FF were never angsty or gritty - they were always light-hearted, despite Ben's gruesome appearance and his moping about it. Gruffyd was a reasonable Reed Richards, though Alexis Denisof would have been perfect. Bruce Greenwood would have been good, had they opted for the older model, but with Fox that was never going to happen. And the characters' powers and abilities were brilliantly realised (even if I miss The Thing's eyebrow ridge!)
The problem was that Tim Story is a lightweight director, Alba never convinced either as Evans' sister or Gruffyd's lover. And while I like Julian McMahon in Nip/Tuck, his character was not Doc Doom, he was some toned down Green Goblin type.
I don't know if an absolute reboot is required. Maybe recast Sue and Doc Doom and start off with Doom undergoing some process that makes him more like the guy in the comics (or even start off with him in Latveria and in the full garb, no explanation offered). Bring in writers and a director who are able to get what made the comics work - ie someone who can do a Favreau or a Nolan. I think in rebooting this series after a mere 2 movies, there's an element of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. They don't have to do a Casino Royale already. Movies like Star Trek First Contact or For Your Eyes Only changed the tones of their respective predecessors in their respective series, without totally rebooting the franchises. No reason why a 3rd FF movie can't do that.
Frankly, the reboot is getting a bit tiresome as a solution to the problems of any and all franchise movies.
The problem was that Tim Story is a lightweight director, Alba never convinced either as Evans' sister or Gruffyd's lover. And while I like Julian McMahon in Nip/Tuck, his character was not Doc Doom, he was some toned down Green Goblin type.
I don't know if an absolute reboot is required. Maybe recast Sue and Doc Doom and start off with Doom undergoing some process that makes him more like the guy in the comics (or even start off with him in Latveria and in the full garb, no explanation offered). Bring in writers and a director who are able to get what made the comics work - ie someone who can do a Favreau or a Nolan. I think in rebooting this series after a mere 2 movies, there's an element of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. They don't have to do a Casino Royale already. Movies like Star Trek First Contact or For Your Eyes Only changed the tones of their respective predecessors in their respective series, without totally rebooting the franchises. No reason why a 3rd FF movie can't do that.
Frankly, the reboot is getting a bit tiresome as a solution to the problems of any and all franchise movies.
Of course the Fantastic Four have a huge element of camp to them, and have a lighter since of adventure then some comics.
But light hearted, with a touch of camp doesn't equal poorly written.
The incredibles for being a full on family film is much lighter, and more campy and multitudes of times better written then either of the FF films.
And for anyone who actually thought Alba did a good job, you seriously get help.
Yes she is very attractive and their is no argument there. But you do understand in film and tv you can have both. People who are attractive and can actually act.
If you just want beauty get soft core porn.
Hell Evans was (is) a good looking guy and I liked him in the film, but it wasn't because he was good looking. It was because he nailed his character.
But light hearted, with a touch of camp doesn't equal poorly written.
The incredibles for being a full on family film is much lighter, and more campy and multitudes of times better written then either of the FF films.
And for anyone who actually thought Alba did a good job, you seriously get help.
Yes she is very attractive and their is no argument there. But you do understand in film and tv you can have both. People who are attractive and can actually act.
If you just want beauty get soft core porn.
Hell Evans was (is) a good looking guy and I liked him in the film, but it wasn't because he was good looking. It was because he nailed his character.
Well I don't hate westerns, I like Back to the Future 3
, just so many were made and so many were trash.
FF 1+2 failed because they didn't take the material serious enough but opted for Alba cleavage, young and "hip" actors and tons of CGI. That was basically it.. tits and SFX shots.
All succesful Superhero movies took their stories serious.. well as serious as you can be with such original material. Either they had very well fitting actors who could act (Downey jr.) or they simply had awesome stories (X2, Dark Knight).
FF had neither of those because Fox opted for the empty brain, popcorn movie approach with huge marketing and they can only ever hope to make really successful movies if they abandon their formula and start hiring people not because they have nice boobs or argue less with the studio but hire people who have some oomph behind them.
I'm sceptic at best.. wait and see.
All succesful Superhero movies took their stories serious.. well as serious as you can be with such original material. Either they had very well fitting actors who could act (Downey jr.) or they simply had awesome stories (X2, Dark Knight).
FF had neither of those because Fox opted for the empty brain, popcorn movie approach with huge marketing and they can only ever hope to make really successful movies if they abandon their formula and start hiring people not because they have nice boobs or argue less with the studio but hire people who have some oomph behind them.
I'm sceptic at best.. wait and see.
Here's an idea, ''DON'T W.A.T.C.H. THEM''!!!
You don't pay money to see them, no money means no production, no production means ''superheros'' fly off IN to the sunset.
Well then can we get Yvonne Strahovski to play Sue this time around?
Get rid of everyone except for Chiklis, who SHOULD be motioned captured for the Thing. I'm sorry, I know there are still a few stalwarts opposed to CGI (which are starting to sound like the die hard silent film fans who opposed the talkies. That went over well), but the Thing is the one character who has to be rendered in the computer.
Also, get a filmaker who embraces the FF universe fully and without prejudice. I'm talking a geek who feels as comfortable within the castles of Latveria or the wastelands of the Negative Zone as he or she is in Manhattan in the Baxter Building.
And if they are looking for a source, check out any of John Byrne's run of the comic. And if they need a lesson in dynamics of s family of superheroes, they should watch the Incredibles, which is still a better Fantastic Four movie than any other Fantastic Four movie.
Also, get a filmaker who embraces the FF universe fully and without prejudice. I'm talking a geek who feels as comfortable within the castles of Latveria or the wastelands of the Negative Zone as he or she is in Manhattan in the Baxter Building.
And if they are looking for a source, check out any of John Byrne's run of the comic. And if they need a lesson in dynamics of s family of superheroes, they should watch the Incredibles, which is still a better Fantastic Four movie than any other Fantastic Four movie.
Last edited:
I know I think they could have made better FF movies, but hauling in over $330 and $290 million, respectively, I'm surprised the studio thinks so.
lol hey even for just nostalgic reasons i'd go see a wonder twins movie over a fantastic four. :P
weren't they actually mulling over a wonder twins movie concept a few years back?
