The Fantastic Four (Reboot)

pmasterson95

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And other than your Wolverine choice there are dozens (more.. ) of examples, sites, blogs, YouTubes and articles countering you

Well considering they could be published by the likes of you thats not exactly suprising.

I'm just going by what Marvel/Comics have actually said in the actual canon. Marvel's own website says here http://marvel.com/universe/Mister_Fantastic that he is "one of the smartest of his generation" you are claiming he IS the smartest. If you and your unofficial fan sources want to challenge Marvel go ahead. Its not me you are arguing with its the actual company and the comics canon.

Nice tone buddy

Where is your canon BTW?
Prof X not even in top 8 according to intelligencia story, although McCoy is

OwaynOTT

The more important question is, who's the strongest?

brianregan09

So I actually watched it last night and it wasn't half as bad as i expected it to be , Still pretty bad though ,

I kind of liked the fact Doom was nigh on invincible when they found him back in the other planet , I absolutely hate how they skipped over loads it feels like there's a whole movie on the cutting room floor , Like they get there powers..reed escapes ...flash forward there all working for the government ......It was very detached and that took away an awful lot of the movie

Ben actually looked great as did the Human Torch ,actually all there powers were done really well to be honest just a pity they forgot to put half the story in and Doom although he looked great would his problem not been with Reed who on a drunken whim (yep seriously) decided to go to the other planet for the 1st time ever

Agent Coulson

I quiet liked it.

Ok it's not great in any way shape or form.

You can see what Trank was aiming for from the 4 & Doom themselves.

You can also see why the studio took control to try and edit and cut it.

Trank's version probably would Watchmen directors cut length time wise without really expanding the story.

OU812

Wasn't expecting much from this, got exactly what I was expecting.

Gonna go watch the 2005 version now to try to wipe this from memory.

Alfred Borden

The first hour wasnt as bad as I expected but its all downhill after that. The whole film just seemed rushed. 4//10

johnnysmack

Best part was seeing homer Simpson in the first 5 mins. Haven't seen him on screen since his stargate sg1 cameo.

Username here

Christ on a bike, that was as poor a film as I've seen in a long time.

Harry Palmr

Fallen off a cliff at the box office - $8 million estimate for the second weekend and a tally of $41m after 10 days.

RedemptionZ

What was the budget anyone know?5

MilesMorales1

RedemptionZ wrote: »

What was the budget anyone know?5

The film itself was around 122m, not including the marketing and stuff.

humanji

Is it wrong that I actually want to see this to see how bad it is? From the sound of it, it might make a great double feature with The Room.

You ever see or hear of The Producers? It's this Mel Brooks movie in which these two producers keep trying to put on successful productions, but fail. They then discover this musical, which is so bad, so offensive, but they realize that the more people hear how bad it is, the more people want to go see it and see if it's true.

That's what Fantastic Four has become.

Oafley Jones

cloud493 wrote: »

Nope.

It got at least one thing right so. Sick of those Lee cameos.

SouthTippBass

Deleted User wrote: »

You ever see or hear of The Producers? It's this Mel Brooks movie in which these two producers keep trying to put on successful productions, but fail. They then discover this musical, which is so bad, so offensive, but they realize that the more people hear how bad it is, the more people want to go see it and see if it's true.

That's what Fantastic Four has become.

Thats not exactly the premise of The Producers. They planned to raise $2million (one for me, one for you) put on a $100,000 flop and pocket the rest, closing after one night and moving to Rio.

The plan went to **** when the show was a hit!

SouthTippBass

SouthTippBass wrote: »

Thats not exactly the premise of The Producers. They planned to raise $2million (one for me, one for you) put on a $100,000 flop and pocket the rest, closing after one night and moving to Rio.

The plan went to **** when the show was a hit!

Well.. I thought it was a good comparison 'til now.

Hohum

:pac:

AMKC

Would you believe that this film is number one in Britain. Talk about a bunch of drones. Even the Americans had more sense to know this was dreadfull and to not go see it. Really hope that it is not no.1 here.

Jon Stark

Did it not top our box office as well?

Looper007

AMKC wrote: »

Would you believe that this film is number one in Britain. Talk about a bunch of drones. Even the Americans had more sense to know this was dreadfull and to not go see it. Really hope that it is not no.1 here.

Nope at number 3. shocking stuff from the U.K

1Inside OutDISNEY693 205,880 2,237,967 2Mission: Impossible Rogue NationPARAMOUNT672 180,220 952,966 3Fantastic Four20TH FOX651 141,019 195,870 4SouthpawENTERTNMT463 116,136 753,356 5Gift, TheLIONSGATE511 66,024 66,024 6PixelsSONY62-1 50,171 51,163 7Ant ManDISNEY614 49,431 1,198,441 8MinionsUNIVERSAL667 44,089 3,995,363 9Hot PursuitWARNER472 23,479 142,007 10Ted 2UNIVERSAL355 20,437 1,389,802

e_e

Probably gonna catch flak just for saying this (the internet has it in for this movie to such a bizarre extent, Marvel studio fanboys possibly being a good part of it) but this was one of the more interesting and refreshing superhero films I've seen lately. Not a resounding success but no abject failure either, even the studio hijack of an ending is over in a breath and I can say it was nice to leave one of these movies not having been bored by 40 minutes of tacked on, arbitrary, badly directed and incoherent action at the end. There is no fat on this film at all and thank Christ for there being no pandering of the usual Stan Lee cameo and franchise lip service kind too.

For a good 80 minutes of its runtime this is pretty strong on a thematic level, a science fiction film about young, promising and ambitious upstarts being manipulated by corporate greed to negative ends. Can't help but draw parallels between the movie's arc and what has been done to Josh Trank by the studio system. There are germs of an excellent film in here, it's just a shame that we got a Saturday morning cartoon tacked on at the end and Trank wasn't there to round off the themes and characters in a way that was consistent with the first two thirds.

e_e

Also I think going at this from just a film perspective really helped too, because I could just view the characters as they were in the movie itself and not have to stack it up against the comics. I think it's definitely a good thing that I appreciated them regardless of some outside context. Don't buy the criticism that they were flat and didn't have chemistry, the actors really held the movie together for me.

Mickeroo

This is going to be your new Only God Forgives isn't it e_e? :P

e_e

No that's Blackhat!

pixelburp

Bit like Fury Road's positive hype only serving to disappoint those seeing it after everyone else, I can imagine the notoriety will have the opposite affect on those watching Fantastic Four. Heck I'm still kinda dying to see this, and was nearly through the doors of the cinema to do so at the weekend, but the times didn't suit.

e_e

Was surprised that a multiplex near me was still having morning screenings of it.

A little context for my watch too: When it started a couple came in, sat across from me and pulled out smelly fast food and started playing with their phones while rattling their fast food bags and talking to each other. I was annoyed and ready to dislike the film from the get go but it still managed to hold my attention and have me on the side of appreciating what it was trying to do.

Sleepy

What a mess. It feels like there was an hour or more of footage left on the cutting room floor. Never have I more appreciated the value added to a film by good editing. Guess you have to see it done so poorly to really appreciate when it's done well!

I liked most of the cast, the tone was a little more interesting than the usual emo grim dark with the interesting (albeit simplistic) premise that the 4 needed to escape the clutches of the industrial military complex and the post-return scenes with their powers had a nice edge of horror to them. Then we get a jump and a single line that introduces super suits that allow the heroes to control these horrific powers and the story falls off a cliff.

Hopefully the box-office failure and publicity about Trank's unhappiness with the end result might help prompt the bean-counters in Fox to allow a Directors Cut release to try and claw back some of the losses they've made on this.

OU812

Sleepy wrote: »

Hopefully the box-office failure and publicity about Trank's unhappiness with the end result might help prompt the bean-counters in Fox to allow a Directors Cut release to try and claw back some of the losses they've made on this.

They won't. There was a very open falling out & he's actively trying to have his name removed from the production.

Sleepy

It's a shame because there are hints that there was a decent movie filmed.

Jon Stark

Finally watched this last week and it was simply a bizarre experience. It started encouragingly but it fell into farce from the moment Reed escaped the compound.

I've seen films that have been cut to pieces in the editing room but this felt like an evisceration. That's not to say whatever was left on the floor was any good either.

You could almost pinpoint the moment Trank was escorted off the set, it was that bloody awful.

Nervous Wreck

I think Trank's vision for the movie was utterly flawed anyway. His cast was too young, his backstories were too thin, his exploration of the characters was absent, his tone was way off, the dialogue was ropey, the motivations completely unbecoming and he gave Dr. Doom powers.

There were decent things about it, sure, but it was never going to be a good film.

Frank O. Pinion

I watched the 2005 and 2007 films before this reboot, and they're much more fun and better films.

When everything else about a film, pre-production, post-production, director's actions, etc., is more interesting than the film itself, you've got a problem. The whole thing is bizarre, the origin story, the plot, the characters, the editing...so weird.

I got lost on IMDB reading about all the problems, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2503633/board/flat/248938989?p=1, fascinating stuff.

Jon Stark

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

I watched the 2005 and 2007 films before this reboot, and they're much more fun and better films.

When everything else about a film, pre-production, post-production, director's actions, etc., is more interesting than the film itself, you've got a problem. The whole thing is bizarre, the origin story, the plot, the characters, the editing...so weird.

I got lost on IMDB reading about all the problems, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2503633/board/flat/248938989?p=1, fascinating stuff.

That guy on imdb seems like a bit of a tool, captain hindsight and all that. The only issue with casting Jordan as Johnny Storm is that they didn't bother exploring the family dynamic that they went to the bother of establishing. It was simply a pointless venture.

Nervous Wreck

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

I watched the 2005 and 2007 films before this reboot, and they're much more fun and better films.

I agree. They're not great but they're a bita fun and the cast is much better (Ioan Gruffud aside).

Jon Stark wrote: »

That guy on imdb seems like a bit of a tool, captain hindsight and all that. The only issue with casting Jordan as Johnny Storm is that they didn't bother exploring the family dynamic that they went to the bother of establishing. It was simply a pointless venture.

They mentioned that she was adopted; that was enough. Of all the issues people had with the film, that was definitely the silliest for me.

New Ice Age

I just finished watching this. Now, having known about the utter distaste for this film, I was expecting to hate it. And maybe that's why I thought it wasn't as bad as some people make out.

I agree with both e_e and Nervous Wreck.

On one hand I didn't think it was that bad. I liked the actors and their versions of the characters, for the most part. I liked what they were trying to do which I think was not get too wrapped up in creating a movie version of a comic while creating an origin story for the characters.

I think though that in doing so, the whole thing was a bit thin on the ground. The story was seriously lacking.

Also, where did Doom get his cloak!?!

Nervous Wreck

New Ice Age wrote: »

On one hand I didn't think it was that bad. I liked the actors and their versions of the characters, for the most part. I liked what they were trying to do which I think was not get too wrapped up in creating a movie version of a comic while creating an origin story for the characters.

I think though that in doing so, the whole thing was a bit thin on the ground. The story was seriously lacking.

This is a good point that I'm not sure has come up.

Trank went to such great lengths to identify this as a movie that happened to be based on comic book characters (rather than a straight-up comic book movie), that he ignored so much good stuff in the source material. He used some stuff, sure, and I'm sure he thought he was gonna get extra cool points for using the Ultimate universe origins rather than 616, but he ignored too much about the actual characters in the process imo.

New Ice Age

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

This is a good point that I'm not sure has come up.

Trank went to such great lengths to identify this as a movie that happened to be based on comic book characters (rather than a straight-up comic book movie), that he ignored so much good stuff in the source material. He used some stuff, sure, and I'm sure he thought he was gonna get extra cool points for using the Ultimate universe origins rather than 616, but he ignored too much about the actual characters in the process imo.

I must admit, I wouldn't be overly familiar with the comics. It just felt like that to me.

expectationlost

why does someone try to create a teleporter with only one focus point?

expectationlost

chewing gum means you are evil

Nervous Wreck

expectationlost wrote: »

chewing gum means you are evil

Baffling theme.

Turtyturd

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

They mentioned that she was adopted; that was enough. Of all the issues people had with the film, that was definitely the silliest for me.

This actually bothered me, not the storyline explanation but just in general.

I am not a huge fan of changing characters ethnicity as a quick fix to the lack of prominent non white characters in movies overall but this just showed how it's a token gesture to avoid social media outrage. They had 5 main characters; Doom is a villain so changing him was a no go, Thing was a monster so also a no go, changing both Storms would have made more sense but that's too much diversity. Changing Reed would have made most sense and not impacted upon any of the other characters, but changing the lead character would have been too much change.

Frank O. Pinion

Some people's problem with the casting of Michael B. Jordan was not because he was black, but because he only got the job for being friends with Trank, after Chronicle.

-Rumors that the role of the Human Torch is being given to Michael B. Jordan, without anyone else being tested for the part, spread. These are eventually proven to be true. Complaints about this casting decision begin. Aside from Michael B. Jordan, the entire cast was hired mere weeks before filming began.

-Miles Teller, Kate Mara, and Jamie Bell are cast in the film as Mister Fantastic, Invisible Woman, and the Thing. Everyone and their mother criticizes these cast choices, and fans begin to express complete disdain for the reboot. However, anyone who criticizes Michael B. Jordan's earlier casting in the film, be it for the proof of simple nepotism, the unexplained relationship to Kate Mara's character, or simply not liking him in the part, is childishly labelled as a "racist" by the media, with supporters of the film following suit.

-When asked about the role by the paparazzi, Michael B. Jordan tells them that complaining fans will "go see [the movie] anyway", while looking fairly smug.

-Michael B. Jordan mentions that the actual team won't be wearing their iconic outfits in-movie, calling Jack Kirby's classic costumes "cheesy". (Ironically, the actual "containment suit" costumes made for the movie look pretty terrible, as people would eventually find out.) He later describes the title four as having super-disabilities. Again, people don't like hearing that what they like about the superhero team will be completely misrepresented on film.

-Michael B. Jordan goes to Entertainment Weekly to talk about how he's a martyr of being victimized by racist fanboys and a trendsetter for progressivism, even though he only got the part because he was pals with Josh Trank, not to mention that Marvel Studios has included a number of black characters in their setting already. Bear in mind that, at this point, most people have gotten over the idea behind the race change and are just pissed that he got the gig for nepotistic/cronyistic reasons.

That bolded one makes him seen like such a tool, especially after the film's terrible box office results.

Nervous Wreck

Turtyturd wrote: »

This actually bothered me, not the storyline explanation but just in general.

I am not a huge fan of changing characters ethnicity as a quick fix to the lack of prominent non white characters in movies overall but this just showed how it's a token gesture to avoid social media outrage. They had 5 main characters; Doom is a villain so changing him was a no go, Thing was a monster so also a no go, changing both Storms would have made more sense but that's too much diversity. Changing Reed would have made most sense and not impacted upon any of the other characters, but changing the lead character would have been too much change.

his casting was nothing to do with that; it was 100% about Trank casting his pal. Which, incidentally, I don't have a problem with. I actually thought he stood out as one of the few actors in this with charisma.

Then his sister should have been black too. Instead the ram an adoption line in and that's it. Nowhere in the story are they adopted. It was just lazy. Have not heard anyone give out about the Wests, in The Flash series.

Jordan was good in Chronicle so absolutely no issue with Trank casting him. No one gives out about Nolan casting characters from his buddies.

Nervous Wreck

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Then his sister should have been black too. Instead the ram an adoption line in and that's it. Nowhere in the story are they adopted. It was just lazy. Have not heard anyone give out about the Wests, in The Flash series.

Jordan was good in Chronicle so absolutely no issue with Trank casting him. No one gives out about Nolan casting characters from his buddies.

what was lazy? Why should his sister have been black too? What's wrong with her being adopted? Nowhere in the source material does Reed Richards and convince the other characters to travel to an alternate universe for the glory. Nor, for that matter is Johnny Storm black or Victor von Doom a 'cyber hacker'. Why are some of the changes okay and others not?

My point is, in a film that takes a huge amount of liberty with the source material (outright ignoring it for the most part tbh), I don't see why anyone would fixate on the small things like Sue Storm being adopted. Doesn't make much sense as a gripe.

FunLover18

Frank O. Pinion wrote:

That bolded one makes him seen like such a tool, especially after the film's terrible box office results.

To be honest I think he was right and the low box office takings are a result of no one else going to see it.

Nervous Wreck

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

what was lazy? Why should his sister have been black too? What's wrong with her being adopted? Nowhere in the source material does Reed Richards and convince the other characters to travel to an alternate universe for the glory. Nor, for that matter is Johnny Storm black or Victor von Doom a 'cyber hacker'. Why are some of the changes okay and others not?

My point is, in a film that takes a huge amount of liberty with the source material (outright ignoring it for the most part tbh), I don't see why anyone would fixate on the small things like Sue Storm being adopted. Doesn't make much sense as a gripe.

Because the characters are what matter, not the situation. It just added a layer of needless exposition requirement that would easily have been avoides by just making them a black family vs introducing pointless one liner

Nervous Wreck

Deleted User wrote: »

Because the characters are what matter, not the situation. It just added a layer of needless exposition requirement that would easily have been avoides by just making them a black family vs introducing pointless one liner

Surely changing Doom into an emo kid with telekinesis, changing Reed into a moron who gets drunk and goes to the other world for the kudos, and completely sidelining Ben Grimm are worse than having Sue say "I'm adopted"?

expectationlost

Deleted User wrote: »

Then his sister should have been black too. Instead the ram an adoption line in and that's it. Nowhere in the story are they adopted. It was just lazy. Have not heard anyone give out about the Wests, in The Flash series.

Jordan was good in Chronicle so absolutely no issue with Trank casting him. No one gives out about Nolan casting characters from his buddies.

well they had this continous line that the guy was going round looking for genius kids to work in the baxter institute, he finds richards as a teen, so he found sue at an earlier point and adopted her.

Yeah but you only discovered all that after seeing the flick. That was annoying people from the moment of casting. It was pointless