• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Fantastic Four: Grade, Review, Discuss, Sequels?...SPOILERS likely

Film grade

  • A: I'm Mister Fantastic!

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • B: Its clobbering time!

    Votes: 3 6.4%

  • C: The adventures of Herbie

    Votes: 3 6.4%

  • D: Flame off!

    Votes: 3 6.4%

  • E: Doomed

    Votes: 7 14.9%

  • F: Please Fox just give the rights back to Marvel

    Votes: 30 63.8%
  • Total voters
    47
I would also point that that it isn't like Kinberg is some sort of hack who can't produce a good comic book adaptation and who can't work with a director, as evinced by his work with Singer and Vaughan on the last two X films.
 
Yeah, the studio can't "hijack the movie" - they own the movie from the beginning; everyone involved is hired to produce a commercial product. This isn't about Spielberg with a project of his own and people he likes to work with and a track record of delivering. It's not about a young director finding people who believe in something he's developed to back him in making a personal film. This is about people making a nine-figure investment in some property they've licensed with one objective and the people they choose to employ in that pursuit.
 
Obiwanshinobi said:
I just stumbled upon this on the social medias

http://comicbook.com/2015/08/10/fox-still-committed-to-fantastic-four-characters-despite-disappo/

Also even if the rights did fall back into marvel's hands, Marvel Studios has their schedule full so we most likely won't be seeing anything on the MCU side of things that hasn't already been announced until after the Inhumans movie anyways.
Click to expand...
What I want for the MCU & especially as it relates to the two part Infinity War films for '18/'19 isn't the Fantastic Four themselves. It's the characters tied to them: Silver Surfer and Galactus mainly.
Those two would be great additions to what is sure to be fairly large cosmic events, especially part 2 of IW.

At some point in Phase 4 I'd just introduce the FF in someone else's film, like Black Panther is getting in CA:Civil War before getting his solo. Then sometime in the mid-2020's a solo film with the FF might could be attempted again. The stink needs time to fade. Batman Begins ha 8 years between it and B&R and even Begins crawled to it's $200m finish. Everyone now sees, thanks to Sony what happens when you restart and it's just not fresh enough to differentiate itself as to why you restarted.
 
Yeah, Kinberg has done to much good stuff in the past for me to think any of the blame lies on him. Although he did co-write X-Men: The Last Stand.....
 
I don't see how the studio and the producers can get away with any less than at least 50% of the blame for the movie's failure. They had to have signed off on the idea of casting less than age appropriate actors to play Reed, Sue, Ben and Doom. They had to have signed off on that dull script and the dark and dour tone of the movie. Can anyone imagine Marvel signing off on any of this for a FF movie?

It's like the studio heard the complaints from fans about Batman and Robin and Green Lantern and thought the complaints about the Tim Story FF movies were in the same category. That wasn't true because the Story movies got the relationships between the FF and tone of an FF movie just right. Rather than realize this, FOX pretty much threw out everything, including the good stuff, and gave us a Dark Knight-esque version of an FF movie. The totally wrong approach.

Hard to imagine FOX learning anything substantive from this. I can easily see them trying it again, and again completely missing what makes the FF unique. They'll probably write this debacle off as "we hired the wrong director" when the problems go much deeper than that.
 
Dennis said:
Yeah, the studio can't "hijack the movie" - they own the movie from the beginning; everyone involved is hired to produce a commercial product. This isn't about Spielberg with a project of his own and people he likes to work with and a track record of delivering. It's not about a young director finding people who believe in something he's developed to back him in making a personal film. This is about people making a nine-figure investment in some property they've licensed with one objective and the people they choose to employ in that pursuit.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much went on that we don't really know about--pretty telling that LFL/Disney hit eject on Trank.
 
I've not seen it (and don't plan to) but doesn't the movie end with them basically becoming the Fantastic Four?

So I suppose really could they not still do a sequel with same cast, but have it be a very loose sequel? They could totally change the tone of it, the costumes, the look, style, everything really, but still have it be a "sort of sequel"

I imagine that's what FOX will do. I'd love for them to let Marvel have it back but I'm just not that optimistic about the chances tbh.
 
Not if it keeps under preforming. :(

The only chance this movie now has are the contrary hipsters who want to see a bad movie because then want to thrash against accepted limits of normalcy.

Didn't Ant-Man deliver the Watcher's child?

See!?

Can you imagine an anti-drinking campaign form these people?

"Don't get drunk and go to the Negative Zone, otherwise the Army will give you a city."
 
Last edited:
Ethros said:
I've not seen it (and don't plan to) but doesn't the movie end with them basically becoming the Fantastic Four?

So I suppose really could they not still do a sequel with same cast, but have it be a very loose sequel? They could totally change the tone of it, the costumes, the look, style, everything really, but still have it be a "sort of sequel"

I imagine that's what FOX will do. I'd love for them to let Marvel have it back but I'm just not that optimistic about the chances tbh.
Click to expand...


Absolutely no chance - this version is toxic, whoever does the next one for them is going to start from scratch.
 
I would like to think that they'll just start with a fully-fledged, if recently-established, FF already in existence, much like Marvel appears to be doing with their new Spider-man.
 
Yeah, wouldn't be so sure about the starting from scratch. One thing that works about the movie is the cast, and the notion that the movie is toxic but that's somehow apart from the property itself now is not real strong.
 
What if they used the Bobby Returns manoeuvre from Dallas?

The Thing (Rendered from different, better CGI) Wakes up screaming, reaches into his briefs, finds what he's looking for, and says "Oh, thank god. It's still there."
 
JoeZhang said:
Ethros said:
I've not seen it (and don't plan to) but doesn't the movie end with them basically becoming the Fantastic Four?

So I suppose really could they not still do a sequel with same cast, but have it be a very loose sequel? They could totally change the tone of it, the costumes, the look, style, everything really, but still have it be a "sort of sequel"

I imagine that's what FOX will do. I'd love for them to let Marvel have it back but I'm just not that optimistic about the chances tbh.
Click to expand...


Absolutely no chance - this version is toxic, whoever does the next one for them is going to start from scratch.
Click to expand...

I'm still hoping they'll trade the FF for the X-Men TV rights. It would seem like a good deal - swap a toxic franchise for the rights to expand a well established and thriving property.
 
Considering the absolute pasting this movie is taking, I'd be amazed if Fox ever revisits it with any of the people involved this time around. The movie isn't just tanking, it's already famous for being shit. It's not a superhero film, it's a punchline.
 
Here's another thing that baffled me. Throughout the entire movie Reed has a very noticeable scar on his face and neck, like his throat was cut. They never explain how he got it. I assumed when he got his stretchy powers he would heal the scar but it never happened. I just saw Miles Teller on Seth Meyers and he didn't have the scar IRL so it was movie makeup. Was this something else cut/dropped from the original version?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top