The Fantastic Four Movie Reboot Unveils Its Cast

[ChristopherT]

Wait, wat? I don't seem to understand what you're implying by that comment.

back in 2011 in the main Marvel universe they started a Fantastic Four run where Johnny Storm was no longer around and the fourth member of the team was Spider-man, and the team, as a whole was dressed in white rather than blue.

 

[ninjaRiv]

This whole cast is stupid. I'm not just talking about black Johnny, here; All of them are stupid. It looks stupid. STUPID! Stupid.

Mr Fantastic is obviously too young; he doesn't have that fatherly, approachable look. Even the Ultimate version had that, even if it was less fatherly.

Susan Storm doesn't look right. Am I alone in thinking that? She seems a little soulless.

The Thing, man. Bell as The Thing is stupid. Before he becomes The Thing, Grimm was a big American Football player. Is he just a regular football player, now? A skinny little guy?

And I just don't want Johnny Storm to be black. I don't care, I want it to be more accurate.

Man... It's a terrible looking cast. Maybe it'll be good. I've been surprised before by unusual casting choices. For now, though, I think this move's gonna suck.

 

[JimB]

I definitely prefer the original two Raimi movies over the Amazing Spider-man, and a rather large group of fans agree.

Me too. The Amazing Spider-Man missed the point of Peter Parker's origin very, very hard.

How is Spider-man's origin story era-specific?

It's based on the outdated sci-fi trope that radiation is magic and does whatever it wants to, and it's based on teenage social models that don't really exist any more (brains are much more desirable than they used to be and there's a wider variety of cliques, so Peter Parker as a kid with zero friends because he's smart doesn't ring especially true).

I don't remember anything in the origin that isn't relatable to our current era.

In the broad strokes, I agree, but the specific implementation needs to be updated.

Okay then explain what specific variables and factors I am apparently ignoring.

Social segregation. In a society where Bad Boys is included on lists of "black movies" because the two main characters are black, even though the rest of the movie is teeming with white people and there's not a damned thing about it that makes race an issue, white people are seen as some kind of default and black characters need to pass some sort of rigor test to justify their inclusion. It's a symptom of how our culture still views race.

I still argue that a character's appearance is just as important to that character as their personality and history, especially in a visual medium like comics.

Movies are not comics.

My point is that movie-Bane should at lease resemble comic-Bane to a certain extent, or else there is no point in adapting him.

He's a big dude with a face mask who does the only thing comic-Bane is known for doing. Sounds like comic-Bane to me.

I answer your question with my own question: What's the point of adapting something into a movie if you're just going to take so many liberties the end product barely resembles the original save for a few superficial similarities?

There is one liberty being taken with the upcoming Fantastic Four movie that I know of. If you know of more, then please present them.

When adapting material, you're already limiting your creative vision by basing your work on something that is not your own creation.

My take on it, however, is my vision.

It is the duty of the adapter to balance making changes in order for the adaption to best fit the new medium while at the same time keeping as faithful to the source material as possible.

Who assigns this duty, exactly?

The only similarities between them is that they both break Batman's back, and the reasons they do so are completely different too.

And that they're drugged-up psychos wearing masks.

I don't think it's okay for an adapter to make whatever changes they want.

The people at DC/Time-Warner seem to disagree with you, and I think they have considerably more right to make those judgments than you do.

Also, they aren't the "creators" of what they're adapting, they're only adapters.

Yes, they are. They are creating the movie. No one else is doing that.

You're saying that we should be completely okay with whatever changes the owner of the property wants to make, even though the source material is the 'default' position.

No. You don't have to agree with the choices a filmmaker makes. You just don't have any basis to argue that your take on the character is somehow more valid than the filmmaker's. If it is, then the people who own the rights to the character would probably have given you license to make a movie.

When you word it as if the fans "choose" for Johnny Storm to be white, you're making it seem like they are consciously choosing to make him a certain race when all they're doing is promoting the default.

Which is demonstrably no longer the default.

 

[AetherWolf]

It's funny and also a bit worrying that people wouldn't be throwing these same temper tantrums if they had, say, chosen a white actor, but instead of blond hair, the human torch is now a brunette. It's literally the exact same argument. Why are you so troubled by one of the billions of cardboard cut-out white comic book characters being adapted to a different race? No, really. Ask yourself. If the only answer you can come up with is "MUH COMIC BOOK CANON!!1!" I could probably sit here all day pointing out the vast canon divergences in other comic book films that you ate up without question. And I mean the important, fundamental divergences. Not a harmless minor change in character appearance. Go on. I'll wait.


Anyway. My two cents? From the lack of info so far I find it odd that Susan Storm was cast as white. Adoption, from a biracial family, more distantly related than siblings, step-siblings, or no longer related at all?

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

Yes. [http://timemachineyeah.tumblr.com/post/58648290519/this-is-a-jar-full-of-major-characters]

 

[ChildofGallifrey]

Anyone remember what happened with Idris Elba being (briliantly) cast as Heimdall?

In situations like this, I don't think the race issue is so much a "This actor sucks!" kind of thing, but more along the lines of "We have 50 years of stories showing this character a specific way, why are you changing it?!".

Nobody (that I was aware of at least) was complaining about Idris Elba playing Heimdall because they thought he was a bad actor, but because in all of the comics (and the lore they were based on) Heimdall was white. Same thing here. Michael B. Jordan is a fantastic actor, but he's playing a character that, for the last 53 years, has always been white.

The uproar is more of a "CHANGE?!?" thing than a race thing (though I'm sure there are lots of racists losing their shit right now too).

 

[JimB]

Umm... yeah. I've seen plenty of "brainy" people that are introverted and don't have a lot of friends.

I did not say "don't have a lot of friends." I said "have no friends."

Or are you just counting his history before Spider-Man?

Yes. That is when Peter had no friends.

I don't really see a problem with the whole radiation thing. Plenty of comic characters have far more outlandish origins.

Exposure to radiation is no longer a trope people use for this kind of thing.

I don't think they use the straight up "radiated spider" origin any more.

...Yes, that's my point.

That still doesn't say why it's not okay to make a character that is established to be black, white.

It provokes and calls back to a history of racial oppression, of white people taking things from black people, not to mention extremely unrealistic Hollywood hiring practices of only having one black person for every six or seven white people. Was that really unclear?

But movies are just as much as a visual medium as comics, maybe even more so.

They're still not comics. They do not have the same needs, techniques, creators, or audiences.

Maybe if all you've heard about Bane is that he wears a mask and breaks backs all the time, which is certainly not the only thing he does.

It's the thing the character was created to do, and the defining moment of his career.

Also, he doesn't even wear a mask. It's more like a...breathing apparatus or some shit.

A device can serve two purposes simultaneously. If it can't, then Darth Vader isn't wearing a mask either.

I was referring to the possibility of them changing Johnny Storm's personality and relation to Susan Storm due to the race change.

So you're condemning them for something you don't know they've done. Fantastic.

People take their time on everything you do. Doesn't mean it's stifling their creativity if they aren't able to do whatever they want.

I don't understand the first sentence or what it means, or how it relates to the second sentence.

It is the duty of the adapter to balance making changes in order for the adaption to best fit the new medium while at the same time keeping as faithful to the source material as possible.

Who assigns this duty, exactly?

The very basis of what a good adaption should be.

Nope, huh-uh, sorry, gotta call bullshit on that. You do not get to tell people who do not work for you what they are allowed to do with material that does not belong to you and act as if there is some objective standard for "good adaptation."

Yeah...do you even know anything about Bane beyond some simple details?

Yes, I do, not that it's relevant to me presenting more similarities than the two you seem to be willing to admit and all the others you insist on denying.

If you're referring to the New 52, that's another situation where the fans are highly divisive about.

What? Why would I be talking about that? I'm talking about the people who own the character having the absolute right to do with it whatever they want, and the people who have licensed that character having as much right to do whatever they want as the specific licensing agreement allows them.

They're creating a movie based on something that's already that's been established.

Based on =/= exactly the same/obligated to be exactly the same.

The things they are adapting are not their creations.

I never said they are. I have, in fact, said several fucking times that they are not. See also all the stuff I said about how movie-Bane is not comic-Bane. Jesus Christ.

I don't need to argue anything if the filmmaker is the one making the changes. The burden of proof lies on them to explain why they made the changes; I shouldn't have to defend why they should stay true to the original.

That is not a burden of proof. That is you demanding creators justify their choices to you, and you have no particular right to that justification. You likewise don't get to insist that only the creators are making affirmative statements, since you're making the affirmative statement that the original material created in an entirely different format is completely adequate to being made into a different medium fifty years later. Go ahead, prove that.

It's still the default since the original is still white in the comics.

"Default" and "original" are not the same words, and they do not mean the same things.

 

[Tomeran]

So its yet another soulless hollywood reboot with young unknown actors because they're cheaper.

If this movie ends up good, I'll be -very- surprised. If its yet another crappy reboot a la spiderman-style, then...as expected. The pattern that has been followed here with these kind of movies are worthy of concern. The fact that people still go to see them to such a great extent is worthy of even more concern.

 

[Chris Moses]

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.

They are not even all that pretty, but I still offer my condolences.

 

[AetherWolf]

Yeah, because race is totally the same as hair color, something you can actually easily change with little to no effort *sarcasm*

Again, I'd be bothered by any race change for any character, especially if it's from some other race to white.

As for the canon differences, show me one example where the change is one that drastically changes the appearance of the character from the comics so that the version in the movie barely looks recognizable. Bonus points: don't use any controversial examples like Bane or the Mandarin and they must not be a side character.

Jim Carrey as The Mask. Heimdall in MCU. Electro in Amazing Spider-Man 2. John Constantine. Perry White in Man of Steel. That new Arrow tv series. Ozymandias in Watchmen. Catwoman, Ra's al Ghul, and Joker in TDK. Hell, every aspect of TDK trilogy diverges from Batman canon significantly and that was one of the main appeals of it to many people. Korath in GotG doesn't seem to have drawn too much fanboy rage from what I've seen so far.

I don't see how Jordan makes Johnny Storm "barely recognizable", either. There may not be any costume footage yet, but it's safe to assume Johnny will still be the same guy with the reckless personality, wearing a F4 costume and, you know, the ability to catch on fire. Skin color doesn't alter or distract from the character's most distinguishable features at all. Hugh Jackman is a whole foot taller than Wolverine. That should be a big deal, right? Except it isn't. Because height isn't one of Wolverine's defining features.

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

Yes. [http://timemachineyeah.tumblr.com/post/58648290519/this-is-a-jar-full-of-major-characters]

Ah, the old "There's already a lot of white people in media, they shouldn't care if white characters are made black because equality" argument.

Why, is there something wrong with making up for the way minorities have been erased, shoved in the background, or treated as sub-human throughout western fiction?

 

[CelestDaer]

See I'd understand the whole Heimdall is black thing if the Thor movie was based on the actual Mythology of the ancient Norse, like the Prose Edda or something. But t wasn't, it was based on Marvel Comics science fantasy re-imagining of Norse Mythology. The source material had been thrice bastardised before it even hit the writer's desk, so Heimdall ending up black is the least of the films mythology accuracy.

Because Heimdall was totally one of the gods who went down to Midgard, and thus, could have his skin color recorded.

 

[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.

Ok, WHAT. It would actually be a down-grade in that case. Rather than Doom's flaw being incredible arrogance, something which is the staple of his character, it would make him a mild racist. Not only would that take away a whole lot of sympathy that Doom has (after all, arrogance is far more subjective than racism) it would really underplay the fatal flaw.

Noted, you don't view racism as arrogance or as a fatal flaw.

 

[Pedro The Hutt]

What puzzles me more is why Sue is still white if Johnny's black. This basically means they're rewriting them to not be siblings.