Fantastic Four Reboot Movie Won't Be Based on Any Comics

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
6,341
0
0
Fantastic Four Reboot Movie Won't Be Based on Any Comics


Fox's next superhero reboot throws out the book. Literally.

It's been known for awhile now that Chronicle director Josh Trank's Fantastic Four reboot movie was going to be taking the Marvel heroes in a new direction: Younger versions of the characters, a new origin story, possibly won't even be called The Fantastic Four [http://moviepilot.com/posts/2014/04/10/fantastic-four-reboot-no-costumes-for-the-superheroes-1330508?lt_source=external,manual] in the actual film.

Now, according to an interview in Esquire Latin America, Kate Mara (who portrays Invisible Woman aka Sue Storm in the film) is suggesting that essentially nothing from the comics has survived into this adaptation. Said the actress: "I've never been a fan of comics, I've never actually read one. I was going to for this movie but the director said it wasn't necessary. Well, actually he told us that we shouldn't do it because the plot won't be based on any history of anything already published."

While it's not unheard of for movie adaptations to diverge in all but name from source material, this is the first anyone has heard of such (supposedly) complete disconnection for this particular project. It had been reported at one point (but not confirmed) elsewhere that the film would be drawing primary inspiration from Ultimate Fantastic Four as opposed to the mainstream Marvel Universe.

Fantastic Four (or whatever they end up calling it) has been described by producer Simon Kinberg as "a much more grounded, gritty, realistic movie than the last couple," is currently targeting a June 19, 2015 release date. Along with Mara, the film stars Miles Teller as Mr. Fantastic, Michael B. Jordan as The Human Torch, Jamie Bell as The Thing.


Source: Indiewire [http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/kate-mara-says-the-fantastic-four-movie-wont-be-based-on-the-comic-book-20140715]

Permalink
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
9,235
0
0
huh....this reads like it was ment to incur fan rage EDIT: not specifically hwat she said but everything else pretty much

[quote/]"I've never been a fan of comics, I've never actually read one. I was going to for this movie but the director said it wasn't necessary. Well, actually he told us that we shouldn't do it because the plot won't be based on any history of anything already published."[/quote]
*sigh*....she's gonna get a lot of disproportionate hate for this....
 

RJ Dalton

New member
Aug 13, 2009
1,109
0
0
Fantastic Four "grounded and realistic"? Somehow I believe this is a contradiction of terms. I mean, maybe a woman who turns invisible, a guy who stretches like rubber, a kid who bursts into flames without dying and a guy who's body is made of rock can totally be realistic, but . . .

No. No it can not. If you're going to try to lie to me, Hollywood, at least put some effort into making the lie believable.
 

Uriel_Hayabusa

New member
Apr 7, 2014
196
0
0
Personally, I don't think this should matter so long as the movie itself is good. Besides, even the guys at Marvel themselves have diverged from the comics on more than one occasion.
 

Kameburger

Turtle king
Apr 7, 2012
281
0
0
lol how disconnected does it have to be before it can be argued that they aren't even really using the IP anymore?

Also I'm gonna go out on a limb and say I never much cared for the Fantastic 4 comics. With the exception of the Human Torch which super power would you want? Individually and in separate books the characters are alright but it really takes a lot of them being well "not them" for the Fantastic 4 to even really have any traction at all for me. With this in mind, I actually kinda liked the 1st movie. Pretty much cause I never really expected to like it.

Are there really so many "hardcore" Fantastic 4 fans? I mean not just their apprearences in other medium, but the actual Fantastic 4 Series? Sure the Thing had a kinda cool run on his own, and I liked the role they played in Civil War, but they are like a whole supporting cast of characters to me.

All this considered I really would kind of welcome a completely separated re-imagining of the characters and the story. It's maybe just my opinion and I fully realize that but it can't be worse then the original right?

Also if I am wrong I'll gladly admit to it. It might just be from my point of view.
 

Scarim Coral

Jumped the ship
Legacy
Apr 30, 2020
9,588
1
3
Country
UK
Isn't comicbook films are more successful today then they were in the past (e.g. Blade or Hulk vs Thor) cos they are baed from the comicbook? Well that and better technology but still!
 

keideki

New member
Sep 10, 2008
282
0
0
Every time I read about what they are doing with the Fantastic Four movie franchise I just get this sinking pit feeling in my stomach. It's like they looked at how successful Marvel is with their concepts and say to themselves, lets just do the exact opposite.
 

BrotherRool

New member
Oct 31, 2008
1,924
0
0
The director of Chronicle sounded good, but this is beginning to sound like a trainwreck. If you literally want no connections with the source material, what is the point of the licensing at all?
Vault101 said:
[quote/]"I've never been a fan of comics, I've never actually read one. I was going to for this movie but the director said it wasn't necessary. Well, actually he told us that we shouldn't do it because the plot won't be based on any history of anything already published."
*sigh*....she's gonna get a lot of disproportionate hate for this....[/quote]
The sad thing is, what she actually said was totally reasonable. She doesn't say she hates comic books, she says shes just never read them. That's probably true for like 99% of the actors in Hollywood and it's not like she's ever been the comic book publishers #1 target demographic or anything.

And she knew she was going to do a comic book film so she figured she should read some comic books so she can be true to the role w/e. Which is nice right? She's not so stuck up that she's refusing to read the things, she's not so dismissive of the source material that she's not willing to put in the work.

But then she was strictly instructed not to do any of that by the director. And she's probably going to end up taking a lot of stick for it
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
6,341
0
0
what we need...is a couple big superhero movie bombs so they stop doing shit like this just because superhero movies are supposedly a licence to print money...

and this could well be a candidate...

[small]...and that's called "a silver lining" folks...[/small]
 

GoodNewsOke

New member
Jan 30, 2014
17
0
0
I find it a bit annoying that Hollywood wants to make "comic book movie cash" but apparently doesn't want to make a "comic book movie". They know that these movies make money nowadays but instead of taking someones work and respectfully adapt it into a movie they just cherry-pick one or two aspects and dismiss the rest. To me this all reads as if they are embarrassed of the source material so they cut everything out except the parts that you need in order to market it as a "comic book movie, just like Avengers. And you liked Avengers, right? So come on in and see this one".

But then again, the movie isn't out and there is always the chance that it's actually really good. I doubt it though.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
8,046
0
0
*Snerk* Good luck! I don't read Fantastic Four comics either, but I still know alot from word of mouth alone. Somehow, it will still look like the comics and someone will get mad.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
9,235
0
0
BrotherRool said:
The sad thing is, what she actually said was totally reasonable. She doesn't say she hates comic books, she says shes just never read them. That's probably true for like 99% of the actors in Hollywood and it's not like she's ever been the comic book publishers #1 target demographic or anything.
yeah, I meant most of the rest of the article...not specifically what she said since (as you said) she's not really the prime target for comics

to be fair with a movie you only need the charachters and the general gist, ...since comics themselves are in constant flux...but here its like they want to ditch everything but the name
 

ZZoMBiE13

Ate My Neighbors
Oct 10, 2007
1,050
0
0
I don't mind a creator adapting a property to fit a new medium. Comic Book stories, by design, are difficult to fit into a 2 hour movie. They tend to go on and on to keep the reader coming back month after month. It's natural to make some changes when they move the prospective IP to a new venue, I'd even say it's expected to a degree. Obviously there is a desire to see the cool things the Four can do in the comics come to life on the big screen.

But if you're going to completely distance yourself from the source material, why not just make something new instead of half-assing a beloved property?

Normally I think it's better that some of MARVEL's properties are under the care of other studios. In the comics world the publishers have a bad habit of leaning too heavily on the most popular characters. Sony having the rights to Spidey, Fox having the rights to Logan, these ended up making AVENGERS feel stronger because they had to rely on properties like IRON MAN which historically haven't had Spider-Man numbers (even though he was popular, he's no Spidey). But I really wish MARVEL could get the rights to the Fantastic Four back. For one reason and one reason only; I would love to see AVENGERS 4 where they have to take on Doctor Doom who is my favorite MARVEL villain.
 

Shiftygiant

New member
Apr 12, 2011
211
0
0
Not a good sign. I understand that a lot of comic movies do there own thing, but you need a base story. Also, why the hell does the actress not read the comics? Granted, I imagine she would have read for the sake of the character, but really Kingberg? Way to drop the ball.

I know it's early, but I'm seeing this movie being this decades Silver Surfer.
 

rodneyy

humm odd
Sep 10, 2008
86
0
0
i dont get why they are even bothering to call it a fantastic four film then, i mean if noting is going to survive from the original source other than the powers why not just make a totally different film that does not have to pay lip service to something else and maybe has a slightly different lineup of powers give them the freedom.

i mean you will only piss off the established fanbase if you change everything and any new people to it the name wont mean anything so the name does not matter.
 

immortalfrieza

Senior Member
Legacy
May 2, 2020
1,126
49
23
Country
USA
rodneyy said:
i dont get why they are even bothering to call it a fantastic four film then, i mean if noting is going to survive from the original source other than the powers why not just make a totally different film that does not have to pay lip service to something else and maybe has a slightly different lineup of powers give them the freedom.

i mean you will only piss off the established fanbase if you change everything and any new people to it the name wont mean anything so the name does not matter.
I'll reserve judgement until it's actually out, but from what I've seen so far this looks like what I would call a lazy half assed cash-in that exists solely to retain the rights and make some quick cash off of the name.
 

Nowhere Man

New member
Mar 10, 2013
209
0
0
Then why bother calling it Fantastic Four? They want to do there own thing with it but don't have the balls to not ride on the coat tails of the IP name. I hope this fails so hard. And this is coming from someone who really enjoyed Chronicle.
 

Kahani

New member
May 25, 2011
480
0
0
Kameburger said:
lol how disconnected does it have to be before it can be argued that they aren't even really using the IP anymore?
That's an interesting point. If it's not called "Fantastic Four", doesn't call the characters that at any point, and isn't based on anything published about the Fantastic Four, surely Marvel can just point out that it's clearly not the Fantastic Four and claim back the film rights?

BrotherRool said:
And she knew she was going to do a comic book film so she figured she should read some comic books so she can be true to the role w/e. Which is nice right? She's not so stuck up that she's refusing to read the things, she's not so dismissive of the source material that she's not willing to put in the work.

But then she was strictly instructed not to do any of that by the director. And she's probably going to end up taking a lot of stick for it
Yes, the real problem here appears to be the director. What kind of idiot would specifically tell an actress not to do any research on the character they're portraying? Even if you're not basing the story on a previously published one, surely you at least want them to have some idea of who the characters are and why people might be interested in them? And of course, that raises the more fundamental question of why would you want to slap the name of some entirely unrelated IP on your film if you're going out of your way to make sure it has nothing to do with that IP?
 

Akiraking

New member
Jan 7, 2012
52
0
0
I am honestly not that much of a fun of the Fantastic Four. They just stick out in a bad way compared to the rest of the Marvel universe to me. Most likely this is a giant PR mistake and they will either pretend it never happened or apologize saying it was a misunderstanding. I mean I believe what they are saying but they probably just mean they wont name themselves and be given the title at the end by the press or something like how most heroes get named in modern super hero films. Also considering the different cast to what they usually are it would make sense to not rely on characterization that does not match the characterization in the script.
Finally, I am surprised anyone is surprised that they are not using the source material, the plot is just going to be Dr Doom fighting the newly formed Fantastic Four again. It is like Superman they are only known for like one villain.

I hope the films works out because I really like the Xmen films and the Spider-man movies so I would prefer competition to stay strong and Marvel/Disney not to own every superhero movie minus DC.
 

Tsaba

reconnoiter
Oct 6, 2009
722
0
0
I feel like we're not getting the whole story here and that I would be a fool to hop on any band wagon by getting upset about this.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
4,386
0
0
Vault101 said:
huh....this reads like it was ment to incur fan rage EDIT: not specifically hwat she said but everything else pretty much

[quote/]"I've never been a fan of comics, I've never actually read one. I was going to for this movie but the director said it wasn't necessary. Well, actually he told us that we shouldn't do it because the plot won't be based on any history of anything already published."
*sigh*....she's gonna get a lot of disproportionate hate for this....[/quote]I don't see any reason to throw hate at her, all she said was that she had never really read any comics. If anything, it's the writer and director who might/should possibly get hate tossed at them. Mara said that she actually planned on reading some comics to help prepare for this role, that's admirable research for any actress undertaking such a role......then the director said "Nope, in fact I'd prefer if you didn't." No reason to beat up on the actress for this "betrayal" of the source material.

 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
9,235
0
0
RJ 17 said:
*sigh*....she's gonna get a lot of disproportionate hate for this....
I don't see any reason to throw hate at her, all she said was that she had never really read any comics. If anything, it's the writer and director who might/should possibly get hate tossed at them. Mara said that she actually planned on reading some comics to help prepare for this role, that's admirable research for any actress undertaking such a role......then the director said "Nope, in fact I'd prefer if you didn't." No reason to beat up on the actress for this "betrayal" of the source material.
[/quote]

I did say "disproportionate"

cause you know what people can be like

or mabye it wont be notable enough for people to care...
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
664
0
0
A comic book movie with almost zero connection to the actual comic? How did that work out last time...



Yeah... this is sounding more and more like a "just make something to keep the rights out of Marvel's hands... we don't care, just call it 'Fantastic Four' and give them the same names. It doesn't have to be faithful for us to hold on to the movie rights..."

Which reminds me of the last time they tried to do that as well...


I'm almost eager to see how badly this blows up.
 

fight me in space

New member
Jul 8, 2014
5
0
0
MovieBob said:
Fantastic Four (or whatever they end up calling it) has been described by producer Simon Kinberg as "a much more grounded, gritty, realistic movie than the last couple,"
Please forgive this movie. We purposefully made it wrong, as a joke.
 

Falterfire

New member
Jul 9, 2012
372
0
0
I have no problems with them writing a new story featuring the Fantastic Four characters - A lot of good comic book adaptations feature new stories featuring existing characters - but it seems really odd to specifically suggest the actress not read any comics just because they weren't basing it off an existing story.

As for her having never read a comic book: That puts her in with 99% of the population. For all Marvel & DC stuff is huge, neither has done a great job of effectively selling the actual comic books to anybody who wasn't already buying them.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
1,936
0
0
Gritty and realistic huh? I already hate the sound of it. One of the hallmarks of the series is how "Fantastic" it is. Fantastic in their context means imaginative or fanciful, remote from reality. I was fine with the cast choice and this makes it look even more fine since it will be nothing like Marvels first family in anything but name.
 

SonOfVoorhees

New member
Aug 3, 2011
1,732
0
0
So its a FF movie with nothing to do with FF comics and wont be called FF? So just a movie with four heroes with minor links to the Ultimate FF? That sounds terrible. Also the grounded, gritty and realistic comment is even worst. I actually liked the original 2 FF movies - ok they had their problems but it was light hearted and fun. Why is it directors are going for gritty instead of being like the source material?

Actually if they arnt even calling it Fantastic Four, how are they going to advertise this as a Fantastic Four movie?
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
12,495
0
0
Vault101 said:
*sigh*....she's gonna get a lot of disproportionate hate for this....
BrotherRool said:
The sad thing is, what she actually said was totally reasonable.
I think I know the solution. This is only really going to become a huge thing because she's a woman who doesn't read comics, right?

We recast Sue Storm. She will now be played by a man.

Now, don't get me wrong. Sue will still be a woman. And we'll still do all the things that are typically done to women in comics. She'll develop from virtually useless sometimes damsel into the mama bear archetype, possibly pose in some skimpy outfits (or with Sue, end up "tastefully" naked) and still marry Reed Richards. For all intents and purposes, she will still be a woman. We'll just have a man playing her. My choice? Patrick Stewart. Because he's so damn manly, no nerd can object! And even if he never even thought about reading a comic, who would question him?

RJ 17 said:
I don't see any reason to throw hate at her, all she said was that she had never really read any comics.
Then you're more reasonable than 97% of the fandom.

ZZoMBiE13 said:
I don't mind a creator adapting a property to fit a new medium. Comic Book stories, by design, are difficult to fit into a 2 hour movie. They tend to go on and on to keep the reader coming back month after month. It's natural to make some changes when they move the prospective IP to a new venue, I'd even say it's expected to a degree. Obviously there is a desire to see the cool things the Four can do in the comics come to life on the big screen.
It really can be of great benefit. Iron Man took some fairly large liberties. I think all the good ones did. OF course, they key here is they took "liberties."

But if you're going to completely distance yourself from the source material, why not just make something new instead of half-assing a beloved property?
Licensing. Though I wouldn't say that this will be completely distanced from the source material just because they don't use the name in the movie or wear costumes. Or base it specifically upon any comics. Not that I'm particlarly convinced this will be good, or there will be any merit, just saying. Babies and bathwater.

Normally I think it's better that some of MARVEL's properties are under the care of other studios. In the comics world the publishers have a bad habit of leaning too heavily on the most popular characters.
I'm not sure this wouldn't have happened anyway. They're making a Guardians of the Galaxy movie. There's about 3,000 comics they could have adapted first which are better known to the general public (if only relatively).
 

spwatkins

New member
Nov 11, 2009
43
0
0
RJ Dalton said:
Fantastic Four "grounded and realistic"? Somehow I believe this is a contradiction of terms. I mean, maybe a woman who turns invisible, a guy who stretches like rubber, a kid who bursts into flames without dying and a guy who's body is made of rock can totally be realistic, but . . .

No. No it can not. If you're going to try to lie to me, Hollywood, at least put some effort into making the lie believable.
You need to think metaphorically.
Invisible woman == symbol of the marginalization of women in society
Flaming teenager == symbol for youthful rebellion
Stretching man == symbol of male ego torn in different directions by traditional gender roles and new societal expectations
Ugly rock man == symbol of repressed rage and body shaming
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
6,341
0
0
keideki said:
Every time I read about what they are doing with the Fantastic Four movie franchise I just get this sinking pit feeling in my stomach. It's like they looked at how successful Marvel is with their concepts and say to themselves, lets just do the exact opposite.
Actually...it's moe like Marvel Keeps reminding them : You don't make a movie..we get the IP back and make money with it.

So they'll happily put out crap FF movies just to keep that frpom happening. Saying your not going by any comic arc is basically a way to have a clean slate without having any expectations to meet and brutha does this ever lower expectations of the next FF movie. I mean seriously... I'd actually be surprised if thios movie came out as anything but a Direct to DVD or Cable release. I half expect it to premiere on the Syfy channel.

And yes there is a point where you diverge from the roots of a franchise so much that you might as well take the extra step to create a new IP. But that's not how Producers and Marketers think. So what if it has nothing to do with the brand name.. the brand name will sell it.
 

wswordsmen

New member
Mar 27, 2009
15
0
0
It's official this movie will suck. Not because it isn't based on a comic story, those by definition can be good otherwise the comics couldn't have been good the first time, or The Incredible Hulk TV show or most of the DCAU ext. but because the director told the cast not to read the comics. That means the characters on screen will be new characters going by the names of the comic book heroes we know. It might still be good but it will only be as good as an exact copy of the movie without the FF4 names.

And as for where the hate goes, it belongs squarely on the shoulders of the director who believes that the movie would be better if the script was so different that it won't help to actually know what has kept the comics going for over 50 years.

My opinion of Kate Mara has risen greatly for saying this, although the fact other people don't know to not shoot the messenger means it probably was a mistake for her to do the right thing.
 

faefrost

New member
Jun 2, 2010
679
0
0
Kameburger said:
lol how disconnected does it have to be before it can be argued that they aren't even really using the IP anymore?

w.
I'm thinking Marvel's lawyers will be asking and researching that specific question. Probably this reveals a huge part of the reason behind Marvel's feud with Fox, and why Marvel is literally bury'ing these characters until the movie is well past.

I mean think about it. If Fox uses the movie title Fantastic Four, but uses none of the IP's iconography, the characters are not recognizable (race / sex swaps, etc) they are not named as their traditional characters or group, at what point does it not fulfill the needs of the IP licensing contract? In other words if they release an FF movie, without any recognizable FF content can't Marvel make the claim that it does not fulfill the contract, and therefore the license has expired?
 

vid87

New member
May 17, 2010
348
0
0
I'd like to point out 2 things about the Marvel movies, including this one, that occurred to me:

-What, exactly, is Susan Storm's character at this point? The closest I can figure is "over-protective" of her idiot brother, but considering she's had to evolve out of her "token helpless female" role over the years it could really be anything, which I think may make it reasonable for Mara to not need much background info.

-Many of the Marvel movies, even the "in-house" Avengers canon ones, contain ridiculously dark themes and scenarios, even if they often appear light-hearted on the surface: the post-9/11 undertones of a ravaged and frightened New York; Tony, billionaire tech wizard, blasts away deranged war veterans turned suicide-bombers at the end of IM3; Winter Soldier biting down on a mouth bit before being electrocuted and mind-wiped; Banner talking about trying to blow his brains out but the Hulk wouldn't let him; a female scientist gets incinerated by Scorch in Agents of Shield. Yes it's not constant gloom and angst the way other "mature" hero movies strive for and I'm not looking forward to something intentionally tagged as "grim n gritty," but I think Marvel tends to get away with a lot of disturbing material that not many people point out.
 

EyeReaper

New member
Aug 17, 2011
410
0
0
An adaption that doesn't stick to the source material? Oh Em Gee what a total shocker. I'll bet you that's never happened before...

Oh. Wait.
 

Vivi22

New member
Aug 22, 2010
1,174
0
0
Well, actually he told us that we shouldn't do it because the plot won't be based on any history of anything already published.
It is literally impossible for this to be true and for it to be a Fantastic Four movie.
 

Mr. Q

New member
Apr 30, 2013
360
0
0

This is the kind of douche-bag poser attitude towards comic books that makes me want to take a baseball bat to the heads of every scumbag in Hollywood. If you're so fucking ashamed of a comics source material, THEN DON'T MAKE A FUCKING COMIC BOOK MOVIE! Just because your first movie had comic book like elements does not make you qualified to make your next movie be an actual comic book movie. Mostly because you might not be the right person for the job and you may not have the right mindset for it. AND DON'T YOU FUCKING DARE TELL ME "DURR! THEY MAKE MONEY FOR STUDIOS AND PEOPLE DON'T CARE WHAT THEY WATCH SO LONG AS IT ENTERTAINS THEM!" You know who has that same kind of mentality... FUCKING METH DEALERS AND DRUG ADDICTS!

I'm sorry if I'm going off like this but, as a fan of comic books, this really gets under my skin. The Fantastic Four has always been a series of science fiction and grand adventures. It showcased the drama of these four individuals from different walks of life who eventually came together as a family (albeit a dysfunctional one at times). This was the comic book series that kick-started the Marvel Universe in the silver age - the first series to blaze the trail for many other iconic characters to come out of The House of Ideas. If you cannot stay true to that kind of legacy, you're the worst person to be hired for such a task.

Marvel/Disney, I implore you! Take the remaining Marvel properties back now! These characters and its fans have suffered enough due to the actions of wrong-headed douche-bags and over-hyped hacks who suck at their jobs and just plain suck in general.

*sigh* I'm gonna go watch the rest of Nostalgia Critic's review of BloodRayne with guest reviewers Spoony, Linkara, and a guest appearance of The Cinema Snob. Right now, I could use a good laugh.
 

WhiteTigerShiro

New member
Sep 26, 2008
1,319
0
0
MovieBob said:
" Well, actually he told us that we shouldn't do it because the plot won't be based on any history of anything already published."
That's okay, the other two weren't, either. ;D

Fantastic Four (or whatever they end up calling it) has been described by producer Simon Kinberg as "a much more grounded, gritty, realistic movie than the last couple," is currently targeting a June 19, 2015 release date.
What!? That's a terrible idea! Hasn't this guy been paying attention to DC launch train wreck after train wreck using that exact same premise? Comics are silly and unrealistic, that's how we like them! That's what makes them good. That's what makes Marvel's movies work (thus far). By all means, change the origins and ages of the characters; X-Men Evolution did just that and worked spectacularly, after-all. You know what Evolution didn't do? Make a "grounded, gritty, realistic" TV series.
 

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
1,472
0
0
Nononononononononono NO! Just NO! The Fantastic Four are the exact opposite of "gritty and realistic" and are meant to be all about super-science and a wide range of mind-blowing concepts. And telling the cast to not read any comic stories to understand their characters? It's like they're trying to sabotage it!
 

angel85

New member
Dec 31, 2008
77
0
0
so comic book movies only became popular when they started getting closer to the source material, but they're actively making a POINT of NOT making this movie like the source material...have they been hiding under a rock for the last 15 years or something?!
 

crazygameguy4ever

New member
Jul 2, 2012
392
0
0
wow... this sounds like a really bad film.. telling the actors and actresses not to read any of the comics the film they're doing is based on.. not calling them selves the fantastic 4.. having the with no costumes and of course making the dumb decision to make the human torch a black guy (simply because it worked in once instance of changing Nick Fury to a black guy).. it really sounds like the people involved with this film no little if anything about the fantastic 4 characters.. this is going to be Batman & Robin the movie level of bad all over again.. enough with making white characters black simply because it worked once with Fury.. that only worked because of Samuel L.Jackson.. it hasn't worked any other time like with the untalented Jamie Fox as a black version of Electro.. enough with changing white characters to black.. or male character to female for no reason like they're doing with Thor
 

JagermanXcell

New member
Oct 1, 2012
540
0
0
"a much more grounded, gritty, realistic movie than the last couple,"

Screw not sticking to source material, attempts at turning F4 into Batman is where the movie will die. Well... it already kinda died when the cast was revealed but you get the point.
 

Orga777

New member
Jan 2, 2008
105
0
0
I just don't understand. If there is absolutely nothing Fantastic Four related other than the name, then why even bother calling it the Fantastic Four to begin with? They should have just made a completely new story out of this instead of whatever garbage they are doing here. I understand why Marvel is so pissed at Fox when it comes to their IPs. Useless morons. It is hard to imagine something worse than the first two movies, but this sounds like it makes the first two as masterpieces. I am never going to get a legitimate Doctor Doom on the big screen. :(
 

PunkRex

New member
Feb 19, 2010
1,255
0
0
Ho boy, this is gonna be bad, and i'm not talking about the film (although that's proberly gonna be bad). This is gonna cause such a back lash as to shake the very heavens.
 

RJ Dalton

New member
Aug 13, 2009
1,109
0
0
spwatkins said:
RJ Dalton said:
Fantastic Four "grounded and realistic"? Somehow I believe this is a contradiction of terms. I mean, maybe a woman who turns invisible, a guy who stretches like rubber, a kid who bursts into flames without dying and a guy who's body is made of rock can totally be realistic, but . . .

No. No it can not. If you're going to try to lie to me, Hollywood, at least put some effort into making the lie believable.
You need to think metaphorically.
Invisible woman == symbol of the marginalization of women in society
Flaming teenager == symbol for youthful rebellion
Stretching man == symbol of male ego torn in different directions by traditional gender roles and new societal expectations
Ugly rock man == symbol of repressed rage and body shaming
Somehow, I believe you and I are operating on different definitions of the word "realistic." Or possibly you're being sarcastic. It's hard to tell on the internet.
 

Diddy_Mao

New member
Jan 14, 2009
573
0
0
If ever there was a Marvel series that should avoid gritty realism, it's the Fantastic Four.

I want mole people and invaders from negative dimensions!
I want a man named Viktor Von Doom to menace the world by threatening to tear open a quantum-kepplar rift in the reality matrix using his inverse flux nano generator!
 

Fairly Chaotic

New member
Jun 18, 2014
24
0
0
vid87 said:
Not to be offensive but way to miss the mark on this. Yes, there have been a lot of dark themes and serious/gritty issues among the Marvel comics. Look no further than the Captain America and Punisher for the most gritty of material. Each line of comics has a constant theme and style to it that is maintained even when they crossover. Someone has already posted that "The Fantastic Four" is known for being a science fiction fantasy. This director has no intentions of making a sci-fi fantasy.

I'm not a fantastic four expert or even a comic expert in the lease, but I have noticed that when story-lines combine for a dark plot, the Fancy 4 are rarely seen. The darkest I've ever seen their characters is during Civil War. Every time I thumb through a Fantastic comic, I always see them in space or an alternate dimension. Whenever Cap is fighting evil regimes, Iron Man is fighting competitors and screwing every woman he encounters and Webs is fighting nemesis# 15 for the 127th time, the Fantastic Four are in some other part of the universe helping mystical aliens and exploring new worlds/dimensions. The team is, in fact, a bunch of genius researchers and one pilot. However, counterpoint: the ultimate universe did lend the series a darker tone.

The only way to do the series justice is to make a fantasy set in space. Square-Enix Some other studio could easily handle something like that. Doesn't matter though because we all know how this is going to turn out: like Raimi's Spiderman 3. Fans and people who are fans of literary consistency will hate it while the "Y'know I thought it was alright" crowd will enjoy it.
 

FPLOON

Your #1 Source for the Dino Porn
Jul 10, 2013
6,308
0
0
spwatkins said:
Invisible woman == symbol of the marginalization of women in society
Flaming teenager == symbol for youthful rebellion
Stretching man == symbol of male ego torn in different directions by traditional gender roles and new societal expectations
Ugly rock man == symbol of repressed rage and body shaming
Either this movie's going to be smarter than it appears to be right now... or we would be giving this movie too much credit in the long run...

OT: Huh... No wonder I was accepting of Johnny Storm being black in this movie... It all makes perfect sense!

But seriously, I want to give this movie the benefit of the doubt... and, so far, I have more faith in this movie than the Dawn of Justice movie... Sure, that could change the more info we hear about it, but I digress... Besides, the most I know about the FF is through that <link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantastic_Four:_World's_Greatest_Heroes>one animated series, anyway...

Also, I'm really hoping there's going to be some optimism hidden within this movie, at least... The thought of a "much more grounded, gritty, realistic" movie is clouding my thoughts of that happening in a more... uh... optimistic way, I guess...
 

vid87

New member
May 17, 2010
348
0
0
Fairly Chaotic said:
vid87 said:
I'm not a fantastic four expert or even a comic expert in the lease, but I have noticed that when story-lines combine for a dark plot, the Fancy 4 are rarely seen. The darkest I've ever seen their characters is during Civil War.
I was originally talking about just the Marvel films, but there was a saga in the comics during which Susan drops Invisible "Girl" for "Woman" after she was freed from being Malice because of Psycho Man and subsequently (presumably) torturing him.
 

keideki

New member
Sep 10, 2008
282
0
0
BigTuk said:
keideki said:
Every time I read about what they are doing with the Fantastic Four movie franchise I just get this sinking pit feeling in my stomach. It's like they looked at how successful Marvel is with their concepts and say to themselves, lets just do the exact opposite.
Actually...it's moe like Marvel Keeps reminding them : You don't make a movie..we get the IP back and make money with it.

So they'll happily put out crap FF movies just to keep that frpom happening. Saying your not going by any comic arc is basically a way to have a clean slate without having any expectations to meet and brutha does this ever lower expectations of the next FF movie. I mean seriously... I'd actually be surprised if thios movie came out as anything but a Direct to DVD or Cable release. I half expect it to premiere on the Syfy channel.

And yes there is a point where you diverge from the roots of a franchise so much that you might as well take the extra step to create a new IP. But that's not how Producers and Marketers think. So what if it has nothing to do with the brand name.. the brand name will sell it.
Just because they loose the license if they don't make movies does not mean that they have to make crappy movies or movies that are not based on the original comic. The only thing they are doing by releasing loads of terrible FF movies is damage their brand and loose oodles of money at box office.
 

Drake Barrow

New member
Jan 10, 2010
55
0
0
Nolanization strikes again! Christopher Nolan is why we can't have nice things. Yes, the actual reasons are infinitely more complex, but I'm just going to take the cheap and easy way out and blame Nolan.

If they wanted a "grim 'n gritty" Fantastic Four film, why not work with the premise from the Marvel limited series Ruins? In that world, absolutely nothing went right at all, and the FF died when they came back to Earth. Reed was horribly distorted and his heart gave out, Johnny burned without being able to protect himself from it, and Sue couldn't see because light passed through her eyes...so she fell on top of still-burning Johnny. The only survivor was Ben Grimm, because he'd been unable to make the trip for reasons that escape me.

So, yeah, there's a grim 'n gritty film right there. A hideous tragedy befalls three great minds, and the Earth has to deal with it. With just a smidge more connection to the IP, you have a non-superhero superhero-related movie.

Or, alternately, license The Four from Planetary. That's got enough grimdark in it to make Quentin Tarantino let fly with a man squee of pure juvenile delight.

OT: hyperbole aside, the commentary being released here doesn't bode well at all. Now that we've had several superhero films under our collective belts that were respectful of the source material while still being watchable, I'm not sure how the total re-imagining is going to play out. It's a wait-and-see game, but this fills me with less confidence than Batman v Superman v the law firm of Howard, Fine, and Howard LLC.
 

Dominic Crossman

New member
Apr 15, 2013
198
0
0
Redhawkmillenium said:
"Grounded, gritty, and realistic". Because everything needs to be Batman to be successful, right? Oh joy.
Yeah, pretty much what I thought when I read this.
They did it to Superman and people hated on it for doing so (along with the avoidable collateral damage that he causes)
I made a bet with a mate that batfleck will be the more cheerful/happy character outta him and supes...
I went off topic a bit :/

Anyway just saying I don't think gritty and f4 go togehter
 

Holythirteen

New member
Mar 1, 2013
61
0
0
Funny, this is what hollywood does with most of it's comic adaptations anyway. To come right out and say this about the movie so early on just reeks of desperation.

What I'm hearing is: "We had an original story idea we wanted to make into a movie but we couldn't get anybody to invest in it, so we slapped the words FANTASTIC FOUR on it."
 

SidheKnight

New member
Nov 28, 2011
93
0
0
This could work.

I didn't give a f*ck for the FF reboot until now. Now I want to see where this is going. If done well, it could be awesome.

I like serious and realistic takes on superheroes, when they're well done (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Ang Lee's Hulk).

We already had two "wacky", "family fun" FF movies. Let's give drama a chance.
 
Sep 24, 2008
1,357
0
0
GoodNewsOke said:
I find it a bit annoying that Hollywood wants to make "comic book movie cash" but apparently doesn't want to make a "comic book movie". They know that these movies make money nowadays but instead of taking someones work and respectfully adapt it into a movie they just cherry-pick one or two aspects and dismiss the rest. To me this all reads as if they are embarrassed of the source material so they cut everything out except the parts that you need in order to market it as a "comic book movie, just like Avengers. And you liked Avengers, right? So come on in and see this one".

But then again, the movie isn't out and there is always the chance that it's actually really good. I doubt it though.
This among others will make almost any hate justified. Definitely not towards the actors, but Everyone else involved with the creation with this.

You wouldn't make Harry Potter into a Sassy Half Asian girl with purple hair just to try your take of the source Material.

You wouldn't make Aragorn a campy gay warrior who finds he can lead just as well as his straight counterparts (although now I have a sudden urge to see that)

You wouldn't reboot it's a Wonderful Life And have *DECADES OLD SPOILERS* George realize life is wonderful and then have him get shoot in the head and rolled because he was secretly involved with the Nazi movement and someone came to get revenge.

You wouldn't change the ending to Gone With The Wind and have Scarlet get so worked up Rhett rebuffed her that she changed her slave owning ways and became the first Conductor for the Underground Railroad.

What makes me upset and I suppose a lot of others is that they only do it to us. Because Geeks, right? No one reads this stuff. Only the billions of people on planet Earth who throw money at this yearly and without fail. It doesn't matter if they don't be as loyal to the source as any other part of media, because no one even knows comic lore so we can do whatever we want!

That's what gets my goat.