*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 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."
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.RJ 17 said:*sigh*....she's gonna get a lot of disproportionate hate for this....
Please forgive this movie. We purposefully made it wrong, as a joke.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,"
Vault101 said:*sigh*....she's gonna get a lot of disproportionate hate for this....
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?BrotherRool said:The sad thing is, what she actually said was totally reasonable.
Then you're more reasonable than 97% of the fandom.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.
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."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.
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.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?
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).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.
You need to think metaphorically.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.
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.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.
It is literally impossible for this to be true and for it to be a Fantastic Four movie.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. ;DMovieBob 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."
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.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.