The Fantastic Four Movie Reboot Unveils Its Cast

[Kahani]

What MovieBob noticed, and missing here, is that this reboot is using ULTIMATE Fantastic Four, in which they are young and sexy.

Well, they're young at least. Miles Teller and Kate Mara barely even look human in those photos.

 

[Tsaba]

well..... the bar has already been set pretty low with the last two movies. I do hope they pull this one off.

 

[Whytewulf]

Skin color is not character. It is not even a character trait. It is a biological marker. Since the character of Heimdall is imaginary, he has no biological markers, and therefore his skin color is irrelevant.

Aren't they all imaginary?

I think you all are forgetting one thing.. Not everyone who sees these movies gives a flying flip about race. I understand there is a certain loud "purist" group, as you said, that wants everything to be like the original comics, but that's just not gonna happen, get over it. Its over 50 years later and things have changed. It's time to update these a bit with how society really is. These franchises are just that, franchises, they need to use their money making names. They also want to try and get a fairly wide audience. But in the end, why do we care? Why can't it just be the best actor for the role, isn't that what we all want anyway? Unless it's a historical figure or pivotal to the plot, I don't get it anymore.

So what, it's ok to just randomly change the races of the character because apparently it's archaic for them to be white?

Not archaic, but not bound to societal viewpoints of a different time. I don't think they are spinning a wheel of race and I don't think they need to force feed something that doesn't make since, but exclusive of the sibling item(previously addressed), does changing the race of any of the characters, effect the central plot or character dynamics? When you cast for a movie, you hire the best person for the role, regardless of race. Just like when you hire anyone in the real world.

 

[V3rtig0]

I don't mean to be too negative, but bear with me.

I'm not a huge fan of Marvel comics (I enjoyed the recent Avengers movies though, both "solo" and the combined one), and even less so of Fantastic Four, but even I know that casting Sue Storm white and Johnny Storm black is wrong. Don't get me wrong, nothing wrong with having a black member of F4. If anything, it would be a rather creative take on the source material (not that I expect this movie to have much creativity either). But make up your damn minds. Either cast them both black, or both white, yellow, red or blue, whatever. But they pretty much have to be the same. Step-brother or adopted brother, which is the only explanation I can come up with other than just forgetting that they're siblings, just doesn't work.

Also, what's up with the young cast? Is this the Kindergarten Four or the Fantastic Four?

But hey, why am I ranting here. Not that I'm likely to watch it, at least not for a few years. Unless it's exceptionally good (I really doubt it will be).

 

[CelestDaer]

There was a Footloose in 2011? What black actor?

 

[fluxy100]

Great another movie based on the ultimate universe. Which means people will moan about not having the characters like the originals when they're not even based on the originals. I'm all for the casting.

 

[Luminous Chroma]

Putting the race thing aside because it's already been discussed to death, the thing that really gets my goat about this casting is that fact that Reed Richards is WAY TOO YOUNG.

Seriously, Richards is supposed to be an experienced, middle aged scientist, not a baby-faced twenty-something. I hate Hollywood's obsession with making all their heroes young and pretty. This shouldn't bug me so much, but Mr. Fantastic is my favorite FF member and it pains me to see this.

This. SO MUCH of this. Didn't Robert Downey Jr prove that a superhero doesn't have to be 19? How about Edward Norton? Mark Ruffalo? Basically the ENTIRE cast of Avengers? I'm fine with Spider-Man being a teenager, but Reed Richards has always been older. It's one of the things that makes his character interesting and believable.

 

[medv4380]

I don't know a lot about genetics, but I suppose it is possible that if the mother is black and the father is white (or vice versa) that one child could be born black and the other could be born white. Or, is that not actually possible? I ask because I genuinely do not know.

Not likely, black skin is multiple dominate genes and white is multiple extremely recessive genes.

In order for this to occur we have to start with Black Parent A's Parents

Grandparent Black Skin Gene AA and BB with a Grandparent Pure White Parent Skin Genes CC and DD. All children of this couple will be AC and BD which is a light skin black color similar to the President, and not like his wife who has darker skin.

The ACBD parent would have to have children with a Pure White CCDD for optimal chances.
1 in 2 will have a CC and 1 in 2 will have a DD but only 1 in 4 will have a CCDD for white 1 in 2 will be ether ACDD/CCBD which is a light black and 1 in 4 will be ACBD like the black parent.

If both parents are ACBD then it's 1 in 8 that they will have a white child of CCDD.

However, when dealing with multiple mixed characteristics like Asian the Yellow Genes are in a different location to the Black/White genes so you end up with a ACBDEE combination which makes it even more unlikely, 1 in 16 or less. I hate dealing with the probability any more than 2 genes.

You can read up on it here [http://books.google.com/books/about/Heredity_of_skin_color_in_negro_white_cr.html?id=Keshc6voFPkC]

It is possible, but only under the right circumstances, and even then the "white" child will have a number of African characteristics other than skin as well. For example, blond is about as bad as white skin for being recessive, though red is probably more recessive, and having a blond white child in this scenario would be highly unlikely more like 1 in 16 or 1 in 32 but I'm not working that probability out to ensure correctness.

Here is a real life example [http://bodyodd.nbcnews.com/_news/2010/07/20/4715095-white-baby-born-to-black-parents].

Personally it's a rare enough occurrence I wish they had scrapped the idea and went with both being the same race. As it stands it seems like an awkward compromise to avoid having a mixed race relationship between Sue and Richard, but sill have a black member of the team, and not be called racist by having it be Ben since he turned into the brutish monster.

 

[JimB]

Oh cool, if everyone's okay with them changing the fundamental characteristics of the franchise they might as well add a new fifth character and call it the Super Five.

Which fundamental characteristic are we talking about? Johnny Storm's level of melanin? Is that what you're saying is so fundamental a change they may as well add more characters and change the name?

I was referring to that little tidbit you mentioned that they might need to change his personality and the fact that he may be adopted in this version. It defeats the entire purpose of trying to adapt the character if you're just going to change those two fundamental details.

When you try to adapt the original, 196whatever story of Peter Parker to the movie, you end up with a dreary Sam Raimi movie. When you try to adapt the original Twilight, you get a four-movie cinematic abortion.

Sometimes you have to change shit to make it work.

Nice double standard there.

Context is not a double standard. If it is, then requiring a doctor be educated before he can be certified is a double standard against people who don't have the training to be doctors. Pretending that things happen in a vacuum is simplistic to the point of inaccuracy.

I guess it's wrong in that scenario because it would "take away" the character from black people (despite race apparently not mattering in regards to the character) and it's okay to do it to a white character because there's apparently too many of them in media.

I am unaware of any character trait Blade possesses that relies on him having African genes in order for him to still be Blade (then again, I'm only aware of Blade from Wesley Snipes's portrayal, and he can barely be said to have a character at all from that standpoint). I am similarly unaware of any character trait Johnny Storm possesses that can only exist within him if he's Aryan. My judgment in this case is based on what purpose the character's race serves and America's history of appropriating figures from other cultures and whitewashing them in order to make them more comfortable and appealing to an entrenched power structure that seems to benefit from racial disparity.

Hell, I felt this way in the Dark Knight Rises with Bane.

If I was making a movie about a steroid-riddled villain in a face mask, I would probably not want to touch with a ten-foot pole the controversy I would deservedly bring upon myself by making him a Latino luchadore.

So what, it's okay to just randomly change the races of the character because apparently it's archaic for them to be white?

Yes. It is exactly okay to do that. Fox owns the movie rights to the character, and has the authority to make that decision. You and I do not. The fact that we have read comic books does not give us the right to decide what Johnny Storm's race must be in a movie.

And?

And what? You asked a yes or no question, and I answered yes. Then I explained why I answered yes. In what way is that unclear?

 

[viranimus]

I really do NOT get the whole "Damn it Fox, give Marvel the rights back and stop screwing it up" as if what Marvel AKA Disneys Biotch has been doing all that much better of a job. Profitable? Yes. Good? Not even in the same galaxy as good.

Not sure if I am close to the only one, but personally I cannot stand Kate Mara. There is just something off about her. Not as it relates to the character, more as an actress, or maybe even a human being. When I look at her, I get the same sort of feeling I got when I was younger and watching the original "V" Tv Series. It is like this sensation of dread from sensing something lurking just underneath the surface just waiting for the right time to rip its own face off.

 

[ChristopherT]

Add another voice to the stupid race argument. I'd be happy if Sue and Johnny were both young beautiful black people, but we only get Johnny? It's not that it's impossible, or not normal, my problem comes down to this is more than likely going to be a short-ish cash in hollywood movie where something like this only adds to the woes. Show two people of the same race, say they're siblings, no questions, we understand - even if there is more to it, the question doesn't arise, two white siblings, one may be adopted, they could be step, half, one may be from a previous marriage, but the two are the same, or close enough, so we don't ask, there's no question. The question is here now, HOW are they siblings? What's the deal, explain. Why not just have both Sue and Johnny black then? Or is it, we have the one woman character, and the one black character, so we're all set to make some money?

Further more, then we have things that may be being said by not being said. Reed is not black, Reed is white, Sue is white, so we can have the nice happy white couple. I just feel that's another part of this BS, either give me a black Sue and Johnny, or a black-white pairing of Sue and Reed, or leave them all white and F-off.

Or!? Are they lying to us, and Michael B. Jordan is not Johnny, because there is no Johnny anymore, and...HE'S SPIDERMAN!!! Black Spider-Man's back! You can shoot down Donald Glover but Michael B. Jordan is here to save the day! Everyone jump into your best whites, it's time to save the day, SAVIN' THE DAY! SAVIN' THE DAY, WHERE IT GETS TO SPIDER-MAN!

 

[JimB]

When you try to adapt the original, 196whatever story of Peter Parker to the movie, you end up with a dreary Sam Raimi movie. When you try to adapt the original Twilight, you get a four-movie cinematic abortion.

Sometimes you have to change shit to make it work.

And those movies stayed pretty true to the characters in the source material (whether that's a good thing for Twilight is debatable).

Yes, they did, and the best of them was still not a very good movie. Say what you want about the Amazing Spider-Man sucking, at least it tried to cast off the era-specific origin story that was created two and a half human generations ago.

What about Johnny Storm having the same personality, appearance, and relation with his sister would not make the film work?

How should I know? I haven't seen the script. At least one person thinks a black person portraying the personality white Johnny Storm holds will make him seem like a racial caricature of a thug, so maybe that's the problem. Ask me again if I ever watch the movie.

Then tell me how it isn't a double standard.

It's not a double standard because you insist on ignoring variables and factors that alter the intent and the outcome of the action, instead focusing on the action to the exclusion of all else. By the methodology you've applied, a soldier in an armed conflict with enemy soldiers should face the same legal penalties as a gang member who murders five people in a drive-by shooting, since both people have performed the same act of shooting people.

The character trait is their appearance, and believe it or not, a white man does not look like a black man.

Appearance is not a character trait. "Character," in the realm of fiction, is defined by the role a person plays and the way he plays it; that's why that famous YouTube review of the Phantom Menace opens up by challenging people to describe the characters in the original trilogy, and then the prequels, without referencing appearance or occupation. Being a specific color is not a role, and there is no way to play a color.

I think Peter Dinklage is a fantastic actor, but I wouldn't want him to physically play a character that isn't a little person in the source material.

No, I'm sure you wouldn't.

You wouldn't need to 'make' him a Latino luchadore because he already is supposed to be one.

Yes, I would, because movie-Bane does not exist before I have made him (we will, for the purposes of this discussion, all pretend Batman & Robin does not exist). Comic-Bane is not movie-Bane.

If you don't like the portrayal of the character in the source material, if you aren't even going to try and make him the slightest bit recognizable to the original, then what's the point of adapting him?

I think your specific example is flawed in that movie-Bane is recognizable as Bane because he has the same name and does the only thing Bane is meant to do, but even speaking in a more general sense, let me respond with a question of my own: what is the point of making a movie if it cannot be anything other than an existing comic book story? Why should I, as a hypothetical filmmaker, debase myself by giving up my vision and my ideas in order to be a stenographer, transcribing another person's words as literally as possible?

Good job cutting off the majority of the quote that is supposed to be the actual rebuttal.

You may have intended it as a rebuttal, but it wasn't one, because it failed to address anything I said. You only shifted the goalposts, admitting that it is, in fact, okay for creators to do what they want with their property, and then changing the subject to ask if that means you're not allowed to complain about it. Well, if you're American, then you have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to be able to complain about it, just as I have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to say that I think your complaints are fundamentally flawed because they are based on a misunderstanding of what the word "character" means.

 

[ChristopherT]

I wouldn't be against a black Spiderman, but only if it an adaption of Miles Morales. And if that was the case, I'd think Michael B. Jordan would be a tad too old to play a teenager. But then again, he does have a somewhat youthful appearance for 27, so it wouldn't be TOO much of a stretch.

But it would be fine, because on the inside of the costume he may be black, but on the outside he'd be white ^_^

 

[medv4380]

I think they missed a possible improvement to the story by not making Reed black.

It would be easier for audiences to understand the original Doom story-line where Doom's project blows up in his face after Reed warns him if he is shown to disregard Reeds advice because Reed's black. It's not completely necessary, but I think people would grasp it quicker than trying to show Doom's hyper level of arrogance without given some obviously false reason to ignore Reed that has to be explained.

Then there is comic continuity that says every Reed is ether Dead, or Evil in every universe except for, maybe, 616. I could see a Black Good Reed being skipped by the Crazy Murderous Reed as more than likely.

 

[SecondPrize]

From left to right in the pic, which of the dudes is the thing and which is the other guy?
I hope they make good moves this time.