Rebooting Fantastic Four (merged)

[J. Robb]

By that thought maybe we should just use cgi on all actors and actress's.
It worked for the best Fantastic Four movie so far:
http://www.workingnet.com/thunderbear/images/the-incredibles-pixar-family.jpg

[The Batman]

Yeah, but even had it been supermarionation Brad Bird still would've made it work.

[arp2008]

It worked for the best Fantastic Four movie so far:
http://www.workingnet.com/thunderbear/images/the-incredibles-pixar-family.jpgSeriously, Pixar + FF = GOLD!!!!!!!!

[nervmeister]

http://sexualityinart.files.wordpress.com/2006/12/mcniven5.JPGYep. Nothing will be good enough for this.

[Stony]

The idea of Dame Judi Dench as Sue Storm is growing on me now...

[Paradox]

arp2008 is aghast:

Are you kidding? Isn't the pic I posted reason enough?

No, not at all.


That would look f*cking fantastic on screen!

Psst...here's a clue. Not everyone wants to see what you want to see. I understand this already, so I understand why you want to. I just disagree.

[arp2008]

No, not at all.



Psst...here's a clue. Not everyone wants to see what you want to see. I understand this already, so I understand why you want to. I just disagree.Wouldn't you at least want to see what a CGI Thing would look like before you dismiss it so completely?

[Paradox]

**shrugs** Sure. But I have a predisposition for the suit, because I thought it looked fine. And I'd dismiss it offhand if they make him Hulk-sized. Bigger isn't necessarily better.

And, yes, I think the picture you posted looks very wrong.

[arp2008]

**shrugs** Sure. But I have a predisposition for the suit, because I thought it looked fine. And I'd dismiss it offhand if they make him Hulk-sized. Bigger isn't necessarily better.As it happens, they've been playing ROTSS all weekend on HBO and even after taking what everyone here as said into consideration the suit, at times, looks very, very bad, and can only guess the reason they didn't opt for CGI was due to budget issues.


And, yes, I think the picture you posted looks very wrong.Unbelievable.

[Paradox]

Welcome to a world where people have different tastes and different opinions. :biggrin:

[arp2008]

Welcome to a world where people have different tastes and different opinions. :biggrin:Such a world has led to two world wars, near genocide, numerous terrorist attacks on America, and a myriad of other atrocities to numerous to mention. Such a world sucks major ass.

[Paradox]

Are you just grumpy or are you seriously suggesting the world should all hold the same opinion as you? :wink:

Vive la différence!

[arp2008]

Are you just grumpy or are you seriously suggesting the world should all hold the same opinion as you? :wink:

Vive la différence! I'm suggesting the FF would be better since were technological advanced enough where we can do better than a guy in a rubber suit. Although, with more money PERHAPS a suit would work just as well.

[Paradox]

That's possibly the most reasonable exchange we've had in this thread. Nice job. :smile:

[kalorama]

I'm suggesting the FF would be better since were technological advanced enough where we can do better than a guy in a rubber suit. Although, with more money PERHAPS a suit would work just as well.

There were many, many problems with the first two movies. How the Thing looked was way down on the list. In other words, if everything else had remained the same, would a "more convincing looking" (whatever that means) Thing have raised the overall quality of the film? Highly doubtful.

[pariah-1972]

I'm really hoping that they tried there hardest to get realistic looking suit for the Thing but considering how they low balled a lot of special fx (save for the cosmic radiation in the first movie) i don't have much faith.

I really don't know how one can make a suit that looks realistic enough so they should just go for CGI i have seen enough instances where it can look good and realistic.

[Toonimator]

I'd be down for Gollum-like CGI so long as it's based around the actor's actual height. We don't need a giant Thing. I'd be perfectly happy with Kirby/Byrne/etc which is basically what we had in the last movies but for the brow. Anything more is just unnecessary eye candy, resources better used elsewhere. Forget Giant Thing, let's see Giant Monsters with the Mole Man leading them. Let's see a trip into the Negative Zone, and a portal being ripped open allowing those alien inhabitants access to Earth.

[pariah-1972]

I'd be down for Gollum-like CGI so long as it's based around the actor's actual height. We don't need a giant Thing. I'd be perfectly happy with Kirby/Byrne/etc which is basically what we had in the last movies but for the brow. Anything more is just unnecessary eye candy, resources better used elsewhere. Forget Giant Thing, let's see Giant Monsters with the Mole Man leading them. Let's see a trip into the Negative Zone, and a portal being ripped open allowing those alien inhabitants access to Earth.He doesn't need to be a giant no but i would prefer him to be at least six feet tall to be more imposing.

[Superbeast]

I'd be fine with an actor in a suit as long as said actor was about 6'4" in said suit. Thing isn't Hulk sized nor should he be. He's a bulky tall guy, but not Hulk sized. Adam Baldwin has the height and physique but I don't know if he could do the voice. That could always be added in post-production though.

[pariah-1972]

Silver Surfer used motion capture right? i think that could work well.

[Superbeast]

Silver Surfer used motion capture right? i think that could work well.

Mocap is probably the next best thing to go with since it at least gives the actor's someone physically present to work off of, the only problem arises when and if the actor's forget their job is to, you know, act and they react to the person in the suit rather than what is meant to be there, for example Malin Akerman fluffing her lines because she couldn't get over how Crudup looked in reality as opposed to reacting to what is meant to be a nude blue bald man. Then there is the problem of extras not reacting the right way either... I honestly think the best thing to minimise that problem would be to stick them on a Skrull homeworld, The Negative Zone or Atlantis where you wouldn't have those kind of problems since everyone would likely look equally ridiculous, levelling the playing field.

[Toonimator]

Thing isn't Hulk sized nor should he be. He's a bulky tall guy
No, he's NOT.

And Pariah, he doesn't need to be tall to be imposing. He's an orange rock monster that can lift trucks. That's enough. Just because he's not the tallest on the team doesn't mean he's Puck or Al Pratt, or even Wolverine. And just because they went & made Wolverine a tall guy in the movies doesn't mean they have to add height to all the other well-established under-6-footers out there.

[Superbeast]

No, he's NOT.

And Pariah, he doesn't need to be tall to be imposing. He's an orange rock monster that can lift trucks. That's enough. Just because he's not the tallest on the team doesn't mean he's Puck or Al Pratt, or even Wolverine. And just because they went & made Wolverine a tall guy in the movies doesn't mean they have to add height to all the other well-established under-6-footers out there.

http://www.marvel.com/universe/Thing

Height
6'

Weight
500 lbs.

So being 6 foot and 500 lbs doesn't make him tall or bulky? Admittedly he's not 8 foot and a 1100lbs like Hulk, but I'd say that's quite tall and since he's not an obese 500lbs, it'd mean he must have some bulk to him.

Considering most screen actors are between 5'10" and 6", making him a few inches taller than the standard human leading man he'll be beside wouldn't exactly being tantamount to making his Alicia black or something... oh wait..

[Tom B]

I hope now that Marvels producing their own movies that they
push for the more majestic over the top feeling.
I think that's where problems start is because the other superhero movies are pretty inconsistant quality wise.
That's what's kind of cool about marvel doing their own thing, but they still have to get a reputation as having a good franchise,
movies can fall apart pretty easily with the public if one or two characters don't work,
or past memories of sitting through a bad superhero movie etc.
or if it's substandard comparatively with other movies that are out.
IronMan, the Hulk,and Spiderman are really positive though,
they just have to stress that this is a Marvel movie rollercoaster ride :D.
I wonder if they're going to have she hulk in it :D

[The Batman]

http://www.marvel.com/universe/Thing

Height
6'

Weight
500 lbs.

So being 6 foot and 500 lbs doesn't make him tall or bulky? Admittedly he's not 8 foot and a 1100lbs like Hulk, but I'd say that's quite tall and since he's not an obese 500lbs, it'd mean he must have some bulk to him.

Considering most screen actors are between 5'10" and 6", making him a few inches taller than the standard human leading man he'll be beside wouldn't exactly being tantamount to making his Alicia black or something... oh wait..

Okay, but they list Reed at 6'1" and Johnny at 5'10". Moon Knight is 6'2", Daredevil in 6' , Captain America is 6'2", and Iron Man is 6' 1". Tall is relative, and when it comes to superheroes being 6' is average height.

[Toonimator]

Considering most screen actors are between 5'10" and 6", making him a few inches taller than the standard human leading man he'll be beside wouldn't exactly being tantamount to making his Alicia black or something... oh wait..
My beef wasn't with the 'bulky' part, it was with the 'tall' (reading the thread shows a lot of people share this sentiment despite artist trends of the last couple decades). He's shorter than Reed, so making him 6'4" in the suit is unnecessary. He's not the Hulk. When I read the classic FF I really enjoyed how Thing WASN'T a giant. He doesn't need to be, nor should he be. Spidey's super-strong, too, yet he's (generally) not drawn as some ripped behemoth of a dude.

[arp2008]

Should Franklin and Val be included somewhere down the line if this new trilogy proves successful?

[kalorama]

My beef wasn't with the 'bulky' part, it was with the 'tall' (reading the thread shows a lot of people share this sentiment despite artist trends of the last couple decades). He's shorter than Reed, so making him 6'4" in the suit is unnecessary. He's not the Hulk. When I read the classic FF I really enjoyed how Thing WASN'T a giant. He doesn't need to be, nor should he be. Spidey's super-strong, too, yet he's (generally) not drawn as some ripped behemoth of a dude.

But, as others have pointed out, 6' 4" (or thereabouts) isn't a giant.

[Black Atom]

Okay, but they list Reed at 6'1" and Johnny at 5'10". Moon Knight is 6'2", Daredevil in 6' , Captain America is 6'2", and Iron Man is 6' 1". Tall is relative, and when it comes to superheroes being 6' is average height.

Yeah, it's not rare to see Reed actually drawn taller than Ben.

[kalorama]

Yeah, it's not rare to see Reed actually drawn taller than Ben.

Depends on the artist, really. But it seems to me it's been more common in recent years (and even not so recent ones) for Ben to be drawn larger. (But then, it's also been more common overall for artists to go "off-model" when drawing characters.)

[The Batman]

Or to forget positioning and proportions so that one character has to either be floating or have their feet buried in the ground for the shot to work.

For an example of this, see the McNiven pic posted earlier.

[Black Atom]

Depends on the artist, really. But it seems to me it's been more common in recent years (and even not so recent ones) for Ben to be drawn larger. (But then, it's also been more common overall for artists to go "off-model" when drawing characters.)

True.

I thought Michael Chiklis as Thing was one of the few things that worked about the FF movie. CG hasn't really worked for either Hulk, in my opinion, though you might have more success with Thing, given that he's a rock-creature and not flesh and blood.

[kalorama]

I don't really think that particular cover is much of a big deal. There's no background or other visual elements to establish a plane or a setting, which would make the disparity between the figures stand out more.. It's more about creating a mood than actually telling a story or presenting a technically correct visualization. I would assume that McNiven is a knowledgeable enough artist to know that then positioning is off and that he did I intentionally to force perspective and highlight the mood of the piece. (I wouldn't give a lot of other artists that much benefit.)

Which is not to say that it's necessarily a good or successful piece, but breaking the rules is within an artist's arsenal, as long as he knows the rule he's breaking.

[kalorama]

True.

I thought Michael Chiklis as Thing was one of the few things that worked about the FF movie. CG hasn't really worked for either Hulk, in my opinion, though you might have more success with Thing, given that he's a rock-creature and not flesh and blood.

Agree with you on Chiklis and on CGI not being the be-all and end-all. They got away with it in Hulk (wonky as it was) because the nature of the "character" was such that, although he looked roughly human, he didn't really act much like one. Grimm is the opposite. And it's the subtleties of human motion and emotion that CGI is less well equipped to handle.

The emotion Chiklis conveys in some of the scenes showing just Ben's face reacting to certain things (like when he finds Reed and Sue cozying up when Reed should be looking for a cure) are exactly why a real actor, even one covered in latex, is better than a digital creation.

[pariah-1972]

Should Franklin and Val be included somewhere down the line if this new trilogy proves successful?Sure why not?

[meethraa]

The emotion Chiklis conveys in some of the scenes showing just Ben's face reacting to certain things (like when he finds Reed and Sue cozying up when Reed should be looking for a cure) are exactly why a real actor, even one covered in latex, is better than a digital creation.
That could be a point, if not for King Kong doing it so, so much better.

EDIT: Heck, WALL-E did it way better as well, without having an actual face...

[The Batman]

I don't really think that particular cover is much of a big deal. There's no background or other visual elements to establish a plane or a setting, which would make the disparity between the figures stand out more.. It's more about creating a mood than actually telling a story or presenting a technically correct visualization. I would assume that McNiven is a knowledgeable enough artist to know that then positioning is off and that he did I intentionally to force perspective and highlight the mood of the piece. (I wouldn't give a lot of other artists that much benefit.)

Which is not to say that it's necessarily a good or successful piece, but breaking the rules is within an artist's arsenal, as long as he knows the rule he's breaking.

Yeah it is, Kirby did it all the time. And honestly, I'm not familiar enough with McNiven's work to know if this is one of those times where he's cheated for effect or if it's symptomatic of an artist who doesn't know the rules at all. That's bad on me I guess.

Still, the point stands. There are more than enough artists out there who draw without regard for things like perspective or proportion or composition or even character model.

[The Batman]

That could be a point, if not for King Kong doing it so, so much better.

EDIT: Heck, WALL-E did it way better as well, without having an actual face...

Sure, but Wall-E was a cartoon though and able to emote and exaggerate in ways that a "realistic" character would not be able to get away with

[kalorama]

There are more than enough artists out there who draw without regard for things like perspective or proportion or composition or even character model.

No argument there.

[Andreas Tanis]

Indeed, just look at '03 Hulk for example. There's always an arist who draws out the way the character will appear in the actual movie, even if it's a CGI creation, and the Hulk's proportions in the '03 movie were very off if you ask me, as the arms were much too long and ape looking, whereas in some shots the legs looked very squat and short, but I get the jist of what you guys meant, I just wanted to provide an example.

[kalorama]

That could be a point, if not for King Kong doing it so, so much better.

EDIT: Heck, WALL-E did it way better as well, without having an actual face...

And how, exactly, did a movie about a giant gorilla and another about a nonhumanoid robot do a "better" job at portraying "the subtleties of human motion and emotion"?

[Andreas Tanis]

They really didn't, you can't compare a CGI robot & gorilla to a real live actor, because no matter how well done the CGI is and how much "emotion" it may seem to convey, it's not as good as the real deal.

[meethraa]

And how, exactly, did a movie about a giant gorilla and another about a nonhumanoid robot do a "better" job at portraying "the subtleties of human motion and emotion"?
Exactly! The fact that a cgi gorilla and a robot were so better at doing it (unless you can tell me that the emotions people were relating to on those movies were NOT human) is more than enough example of how much of a point you didn't really have. Not nowadays, with current technology, anyway.

[Tom B]

I haven't seen it, but I read that Benjamin Button was was around 80 percent cgi.
When he was an old man the head was completely CGI, (http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=4848)
but mapped to brad Pitts expressions.
A big problem I think is when animators start adding Mcfarlane style poses,
or those other type of exagerated poses that animators can come up with,
that wouldn't happen if, for example, they made a practical fx only daredevil.
(which I think would be awesome)
A lot of the last Batman movie looked CG to me, but really good cg.
Standards are pretty high now though, as well as audience expectations as to what is good CGI, because if it dips below what people can see for practically free on the History channel, Sci-fi, or video games, people get pissed off. :D
There are some pretty crazy shows even on Animal Planet :D
You still need good actors though, you can't mix and match great fx with poor actors,
or the other way around, because people will expect that it'll be like 'the Spirit' :D
Marvel has a good track record with story, actors, and fx though, with only a few exceptions.
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=4848

[kalorama]

(unless you can tell me that the emotions people were relating to on those movies were NOT human) is more than enough example of how much of a point you didn't really have. Not nowadays, with current technology, anyway.

Again, it's "the subtleties of human motion and emotion." Wall-E raising his metal eyebrows and Kong pouting glosses over both the "subtle" "human" and "motion" parts. It's easy to mount a counter argument when you cherry pick the parts that you have a response to and ignore the ones that you don't.

[pariah-1972]

I haven't seen it, but I read that Benjamin Button was was around 80 percent cgi.
When he was an old man the head was completely CGI, (http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=4848)
but mapped to brad Pitts expressions.
A big problem I think is when animators start adding Mcfarlane style poses,
or those other type of exagerated poses that animators can come up with,
that wouldn't happen if, for example, they made a practical fx only daredevil.
(which I think would be awesome)
A lot of the last Batman movie looked CG to me, but really good cg.
Standards are pretty high now though, as well as audience expectations as to what is good CGI, because if it dips below what people can see for practically free on the History channel, Sci-fi, or video games, people get pissed off. :D
There are some pretty crazy shows even on Animal Planet :D
You still need good actors though, you can't mix and match great fx with poor actors,
or the other way around, because people will expect that it'll be like 'the Spirit' :D
Marvel has a good track record with story, actors, and fx though, with only a few exceptions.
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=4848
Nolan's movie was probably almost entirely Cgi free he doesn't care for it too much.
The only time i noticed it was when he was flying with his cape between buildings.

[Spiffy]

Thank the high heavens!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They're going new with everything, baby. From the cast to the director to the story to the tone (which will imprudently be darker), the FF will have no ties to the previous egregious failures whatsoever. Hit the links below to learn more about Fox's plans to make a edgier and hopefully more aptly and competently casted FF film.

http://joblo.com/index.php?id=25465&s=&mode=showcomments&from=10

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6457&Itemid=99
Dark? What Fantastic Four have you been reading?

As for the previous two films, I don't see why they get such a bad rap. Other than Jessica Alba's bad acting, I mean. Okay, Doom was kind of crapped up too. But they DID understand the "family" vibe necessary to FF, and the second one especially understood the Cosmic flavor and the sense of fun and comedy the FF is based on. They got a lot right, actually, and only a few really annoying parts wrong.

Dark "fixes" for everything is lazy. It's a template that conveys more of an attempt to clone Batman than any real understanding of other properties. The only real "Dark" part of the FF story concern Ben's feelings about "being a monster", and that's only a small part of the package.

[king mob]

Dark? What Fantastic Four have you been reading?

As for the previous two films, I don't see why they get such a bad rap. Other than Jessica Alba's bad acting, I mean. Okay, Doom was kind of crapped up too. But they DID understand the "family" vibe necessary to FF, and the second one especially understood the Cosmic flavor and the sense of fun and comedy the FF is based on. They got a lot right, actually, and only a few really annoying parts wrong.

Dark "fixes" for everything is lazy. It's a template that conveys more of an attempt to clone Batman than any real understanding of other properties. The only real "Dark" part of the FF story concern Ben's feelings about "being a monster", and that's only a small part of the package.

I tend to agree, 'dark' reboots of anything are just lazy excuses for orginality or trying to do something interesting with material. A 'dark' FF mises the point by a mile and will only pander to a core of vocal fans who didn't get things their way.

The previous films were fine, if somewhat light but that's what Kirby & Lee's FF was like for the majority of their run. They were superhero comic films where one could not expect to see mass murder, death and grimness and actually think it could be fun and enjoyable being a superhero, Ben's situation excepted.

So recasting Alba would be fine as she was a weak link in the first two films, but a broody FF does Lee & Kirby no favours at all.

[kalorama]

The problem with the FF films wasn't in their concepualization, it was in the execution. A so-called reboot isn't necessary. They can use the same framework laid down in the first films, just turn it over to a better writer and director.

[Andreas Tanis]

To be honest, as much as I did like the previous franchise, I feel that a reboot is necessary, because I want to see these characters closer to the comics than they were in the previous films. I'd also like to actually see Dr. Doom done as accurate as possible, and not have some girly voiced douche portray him.

[kalorama]

You've just made my point. Not liking the job done actor who portrayed him is an issue of execution not conceptualization. They don't need to reboot it to get a different actor who delivers a better performance, esp. if they get a new writer and director..

[kalorama]

You've just made my point. Not liking the job done actor who portrayed him is an issue of execution not conceptualization. They don't need to reboot it to get a different actor who delivers a better performance, esp. if they get a new writer and director.

[meethraa]

[
Again, it's "the subtleties of human motion and emotion." Wall-E raising his metal eyebrows and Kong pouting glosses over both the "subtle" "human" and "motion" parts. It's easy to mount a counter argument when you cherry pick the parts that you have a response to and ignore the ones that you don't.

Feel free to read around my point all you want, but if you think that Kong's "pouting" was any less efficient at conveying the subtleties of human emotion than the Thing's rubbery features, then we clearly saw different films on both accounts.
And since one is a giant man-eating ape and the other is a mutated human being, I'm not sure how fair it would be to compare them in terms of human motion, but if nothing else, King Kong is a great example of how the technology is there for a CGI Ben Grimm that could look much better than the one we were given.

[Crowforge]

Who wants to see their origin story yet again?

[meethraa]

Sure, but Wall-E was a cartoon though and able to emote and exaggerate in ways that a "realistic" character would not be able to get away with
But we're talking about this (http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/ATA/24371MV~The-Thing-Posters.jpg) character...

[Whirlwind Dinamo]

The studio Fox should leave Fan4 the hell alone. Galactus a Cloud!? seriously WTF was up with that? :evilangry: I know I'm going to be flamed for this but the whole Galactus thing should have been more like Watchmen. I don't care if FF scored more at the Boxoffice I'm glad Fox wasn't allowed have its way with that Watchmen movie :evilsmile:

[Andreas Tanis]

Dude, shut up. F4 & Watchmen are completely different and should stay that way. Stop coming in every thread and saying F4 should be changed to be like Watchmen. Nobody wants to hear that shit, man.

[Whirlwind Dinamo]

Dude, yes Fan4 made money but did you suddenly forget the headlines and nasty reviews?

"Galactus Clouded by Fox"

" Ny Times : unnecessary sequel to the equally irrelevant if depressingly successful "Fantastic Four "

"Fan Four Surfer Sucks "

"BBC avoid this movie"

"France24, watch a European/Asian film instead"

"Chicago Reader: Surfer, who looks like a gigantic hood ornament and, given voice by Laurence Fishburne, has about as much personality "

"Rolling Stone, perfect summer movie, that is if you're eight years old or under, plotless, brainless "

"Fox Eats Galactus"

"Silver Surfer one of the worst marvel movies "

"EW Silver Surfer is drearier than corn dying in the Iowa sun, slower than molasses in Antarctica. "

"Galactus the Storm Cloud"

"Washinton Post this movie was translated from comic-book Esperanto."

[darkwolf]

I would keep McMahon as Doctor Doom and change everybody else. IMO it wasn't the actors fault, it was the director's. Surfer looked like a platinum version of an Oscar and Galactus was a no show.

[The Batman]

Yeah, but the Surfer DOES look like a platinum version of the Oscar.

http://superherouniverse.com/wiki/images/thumb/0/04/Kirby_Silver_Surfer.jpg/270px-Kirby_Silver_Surfer.jpg

[The Batman]

But we're talking about this (http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/ATA/24371MV~The-Thing-Posters.jpg) character...

I know what the Thing looks like.

If you want him to be able to exist next to real flesh and blood actors he's going to have to act like a flesh and blood actor. That means the sorts of things that Wall-E could get away with, being a cartoon in a cartoon world and all, won't be the same things CGI Thing can get away with.

A better example than Wall-E might be CGI Yoda from Episode II and Episode III. A CGI alien sure, but one that had to use the actor's tools and not the cartoon character's tools to convey feeling and emotion.

[The Batman]

The studio Fox should leave Fan4 the hell alone. Galactus a Cloud!? seriously WTF was up with that? :evilangry: I know I'm going to be flamed for this but the whole Galactus thing should have been more like Watchmen. I don't care if FF scored more at the Boxoffice I'm glad Fox wasn't allowed have its way with that Watchmen movie :evilsmile:

What does "more like Watchmen" mean? Does it mean closer to the comics? Darker? Both? Or something else altogether?

[Darrell D.]

What does "more like Watchmen" mean? Does it mean closer to the comics? Darker? Both? Or something else altogether?

More sex and boobies? More violence? Longer?
Tell us!

[Frank]

I would keep McMahon as Doctor Doom and change everybody else. IMO it wasn't the actors fault, it was the director's. Surfer looked like a platinum version of an Oscar and Galactus was a no show.

McMahon was one of the worst thing about those movies. Doom should have a way more commanding presence. And a big voice. Doom is like Richard Nixon as a scientist only more fit.

[Frank]

BTW the biggest problem with the FF movies so far has been that it was like just another super-hero progect. While in my opinion FF should be bigger than anything we've seen so far in super-hero movies. Those 2 Fox movies lacked in ambition, in scope and imagination.

[Black Atom]

BTW the biggest problem with the FF movies so far has been that it was like just another super-hero progect. While in my opinion FF should be bigger than anything we've seen so far in super-hero movies. Those 2 Fox movies lacked in ambition, in scope and imagination.

Not exactly true. I mean, the second one had a giant space monster trying to eat up the Earth and the FF travelled all over the world. Even the first one had casual space-travel. In conception, the scope was beyond most other superhero movies to-date. In execution? Well...

[Norrin Radd]

The movies never went far enough. A trip into outer space may be a big deal for other heroes, but not for the Fantastic Four. They're imaginauts and are supposed to get into crazy $%&#. That's their M.O. Space clouds are for Star Trek. Giant, cosmic demi-gods are for the FF.

[kalorama]

Feel free to read around my point all you want, but if you think that Kong's "pouting" was any less efficient at conveying the subtleties of human emotion than the Thing's rubbery features, then we clearly saw different films on both accounts.

There's no "reading around" the fact that king Kong is not human. It's not a minor point, no matter how much you try to reduce it to one.

[Crowforge]

Neither is Thing.

[kalorama]

Neither is Thing.


Yes, actually, he is. hHe's a mutated human, but he's human nonetheless, and is certainly recognizable as such in form, feeling, and action.

[darkwolf]

McMahon was one of the worst thing about those movies. Doom should have a way more commanding presence. And a big voice. Doom is like Richard Nixon as a scientist only more fit.

But Doom spent almost 2 movies whitout a mask. And the real Doom always has a mask. Whit it his voice would be more scary. And like i said it was the director's fault not his.
They tried to do a more family friendly FF but that isn't appealing for comic book fans and action/adventure fans. Modernize the team yes, but don't make it a Nickelodeon movie.

[Darrell D.]

But Doom spent almost 2 movies whitout a mask. And the real Doom always has a mask. Whit it his voice would be more scary. And like i said it was the director's fault not his.
They tried to do a more family friendly FF but that isn't appealing for comic book fans and action/adventure fans. Modernize the team yes, but don't make it a Nickelodeon movie.

The comic fans are going to see it no matter what. They were going for a family friendly approach which is what the FF is (or should be) anyway.
I liked the two movies. Big, goofy fun. Which is what superhero comics should be in the first place.

[darkwolf]

I also like them, they weren't great but fun. But after Batman The Dark Knight now everybody wants to copy that gothic, dark tormented kind of way to make movies. And besides FF is a family so we'll have to have those cooky things between them. Even X-men should have more than depressed mutants, have a silly situation once in a awhile. What people don't realize is that FF and even X-men as a "familly" type team shouldn't be all dark and boring leave that to Mr. Bruce "i have no personal life" Wayne.

[Deep_Sleeper]

I think Doug Ellin should work on the script for F4, with a sci-fi consultant.

[Warpsters]

I would like to see Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa's take on an FF movie. He really nailed the family dynamic in Marvel Knights 4.

[BeastieRunner]

1) After watching some movies (not a big fan of him personally) and some recent interviews, I think Vin Diesel would be a good villain for a F4 reboot. Either Doom or Namor, he'd rock. I bet he'd even keep the mask on the whole time for Doom. He'd have a cool voice and face it ... we know it's best not to find someone that will fake the accent.

At least he'd have screen presence, a famous name, and be menacing.

2) Blah! Fanstic Four should be more like that Lost in Space movie but, you know, actually good. It should be more like Incredibles meets Lost in Space meets Star Wars meets Swiss Family Robinson.

[kalorama]

No movie should ever be anything like the Lost in Space movie.

[pariah-1972]

1) After watching some movies (not a big fan of him personally) and some recent interviews, I think Vin Diesel would be a good villain for a F4 reboot. Either Doom or Namor, he'd rock. I bet he'd even keep the mask on the whole time for Doom. He'd have a cool voice and face it ... we know it's best not to find someone that will fake the accent.

At least he'd have screen presence, a famous name, and be menacing.

2) Blah! Fanstic Four should be more like that Lost in Space movie but, you know, actually good. It should be more like Incredibles meets Lost in Space meets Star Wars meets Swiss Family Robinson.
The only problem is Vin Diesel cannot act.

[BeastieRunner]

No movie should ever be anything like the Lost in Space movie.

I was referencing the granduer of it. That's why I said "like it but you know, good." :smile:

The only problem is Vin Diesel cannot act.

As you can see, I did not list that as an on screen trait! :biggrin:

[kalorama]

I was referencing the granduer of it. That's why I said "like it but you know, good."

Any movie that's good is absolutely nothing like the Lost in Space movie.

What "grandeur"?

[Crowforge]

I like Vin myself.

[Deep_Sleeper]

You know...having the feel of something big, scope-wise.

I like the intimate family feel of F4, but it should be like a family stuck in the middle of the ocean, where you see what kind of surroundings this family lives in and it seems so mind-bogglingly huge.

The fact that F4 are a family of science fiction explorers should make that grandeur easy. Tim Story didn't capture that.

[hoffmandu]

I'm jumping on the Jackie Earl bandwagon and calling him as Moleman.

[kalorama]

You know...having the feel of something big, scope-wise.

There was nothing big or grand about Lost In Space. Yes it took place in space (thus the name) but that (A) didn't make it any less a movie about family drama than the FF movies and (B) did nothing to stop it from being a lousy movie. This is another case of fannish focus on side issues (like whether the movie is faithful to the comics) while missing out on the simple big picture of what makes a movie good: story, performance, and execution. There was nothing wrong with the "scope" of the FF movies. They just weren't very well done (although they were somewhat entertaining despite that).

[Deep_Sleeper]

There was nothing big or grand about Lost In Space. Yes it took place in space (thus the name) but that (A) didn't make it any less a movie about family drama than the FF movies and (B) did nothing to stop it from being a lousy movie. This is another case of fannish focus on side issues (like whether the movie is faithful to the comics) while missing out on the simple big picture of what makes a movie good: story, performance, and execution. There was nothing wrong with the "scope" of the FF movies. They just weren't very well done (although they were somewhat entertaining despite that).

Oops. I thought you were questioning the meaning of the word, rather than it's application to Lost in Space.

Never mind. Lost in Space didn't have any grandeur.

[Jeff-E]

This really disappoints me. After Hulk, and Punisher, I'd hope they wouldn't try reboots so soon. Granted both reboots were miles better than the last versions, still the stigma of the previous movies killed them both. But the most disappointing thing to me is that other than Jessica (who I just overlooked) the acting and characters were... well Fantastic. Personally I loved both the F4 movies. I own them both and thought they captured the feeling of the 4. Yeah, Surfer had no personality, but then again, Surfer has no personality. Galactus as a cloud thing, well lets face it, a giant purple clad space demi-god who just happens to look human and has a giant space pope hat would have not played anywhere near as well as it does in the comics.

[pariah-1972]

This really disappoints me. After Hulk, and Punisher, I'd hope they wouldn't try reboots so soon. Granted both reboots were miles better than the last versions, still the stigma of the previous movies killed them both. But the most disappointing thing to me is that other than Jessica (who I just overlooked) the acting and characters were... well Fantastic. Personally I loved both the F4 movies. I own them both and thought they captured the feeling of the 4. Yeah, Surfer had no personality, but then again, Surfer has no personality. Galactus as a cloud thing, well lets face it, a giant purple clad space demi-god who just happens to look human and has a giant space pope hat would have not played anywhere near as well as it does in the comics.As opposed to a Silver skinned humanoid looking alien on a surfboard?

[Jeff-E]

As opposed to a Silver skinned humanoid looking alien on a surfboard?

actually, yeah. I think a giant purple pantsed Galactus with the big ol' hat would have not played off near as well as Surfer did.

[pariah-1972]

actually, yeah. I think a giant purple pantsed Galactus with the big ol' hat would have not played off near as well as Surfer did.

I don't think he has to be purple and i don't think the audiences need to take Galactus 100% seriously.

[kalorama]

I don't think he has to be purple and i don't think the audiences need to take Galactus 100% seriously.

Outside of a Monty Python skit, I think you want th audience to take a giant humanoid alien come to devour the Earth seriously,. And if they don't take him seriously, it becomes a Monty Python skit.

[pariah-1972]

Outside of a Monty Python skit, I think you want th audience to take a giant humanoid alien come to devour the Earth seriously,. And if they don't take him seriously, it becomes a Monty Python skit.Green Goblin's Costume was slightly ridiculous looking and people made fun of it but it didn't turn into a comedy or camp.

[kalorama]

Green Goblin's Costume was slightly ridiculous looking and people made fun of it but it didn't turn into a comedy or camp.

(A) He wasn't a 1,000 foot tall planet eating alien. (B) Yeah, it kinda did.

On a different note, I just saw FF: Rise of the Surfer again on DVD and it's actually better than I remembered it. I enjoyed it originally as a piece of fluff entertainment, but it's actually a better piece of storytelling than I gave it credit for. Not that that's saying much, but still . . .

[Andreas Tanis]

I just wish they'd have kept Galactus as he was in the books, not change him into a damn cloud.

[Frank]

Green Goblin's Costume was slightly ridiculous looking and people made fun of it but it didn't turn into a comedy or camp.

Yea well it's Spider-Man. When an invader comes in to destroy the planet, you have to take him seriously.

[Frank]

BTW, if Fox wants to revamp FF, they should take a crack at Micheal Cabon's script and have a go at it. It was semi-genius.

[DeadXMan]

I just wish they'd have kept Galactus as he was in the books, not change him into a damn cloud.

he wasn't the cloud, the cloud was his machine.

He was the Kirby dots inside, as shown in his origin in Thor by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, and when it was retold by Byrne. the pink armor is what the humans can comprehend while Bata ray's people saw him as a giant single cell organism.

[Whirlwind Dinamo]

I always said Fan 4 Silver Surfer should have been darker, it should have been more dramatic, it should have had a little of that watchmen flavor

I have ranted on this movie before and got flamed by fellow CBR members

Many of you guys know Fantastic Four Silver Surfer has been a pet hate of mine. I think it should have been closer to reality and darker, ok maybe not as dark as Watchmen or something but we should have got more of a sense of impending doom. Galactus was a creature that destroyed alien civilizations for goodness sakes, he and his Surfer left a trail of mayhem and extermination across the Universe. They killed thousands of trillions of people and wiped out entire worlds, we should have seen something that scared us not some silly cloud and corny one-liners. I don't want to be flamed too much for this, since some people on CBR forums go a bit nuts on me when I say Fan4 Surfer should be dark

Maybe a more soft family film is a fine idea
I agree it might be nice to see a good old fashioned nice family movie....but really not like this. Fan 4 was just lame, the jokes went down like a lead balloon. You had Johnny Storm going I'm hot, and hellloooo nurse going you're hot and Johnny going yes I am hot and those were supposed to be some of the best gags of the movie.
Fox really made a mess of Silver Surfer, they were probably rubbing their mitts trying to make the most juvenile movie and get as many butts into the seats as possible. The Fox execs they got that action figure gag, wow we can sell more Sue, Johnny toys....one of them asks
Fox Exec 5 : "what about this big Galactus thing... We'll have no pay some company in China 200 G's to make more dolls 4 feet tall"
Fox Exec 1 : Don't worry about that....we'll just make him a cloud or something
and use some photoshopped stock footage from some old Star Trek epsiodes"
Fox Exec 5 : "Are you sure that will work?"
Fox Exec 1 : "Don't worry about it"
Fox Exec 5 : "Have you got a script?"
Fox Exec 1 : "No but we've got actors and we've got these toys"
Ok you make Fan4 fun and family. But don't give it to Fox
Give it to a studio who knows something about family movies, I'll watch the cartoons, I'll go to the cinema with the kids and what works is something from Disney or Dreamworks.
I love watching movies like MonsterHouse or LionKing
Give us a good movie not a crap Fox one trying to be everything, young adult, kids, adult, toy company advertisement...you name it Fox did it and failed....and the critics have ripped them apart for it.

If you want a great family movie we can all watch then Marvel give the damn thing to Disney or Dreamworks, so we and all the kids can all see Surfer warp speed across the Galaxy Wall-E style and let the animation studios can make the Fan4 ten times more Fun than your 2004 Incredibles.

[Andreas Tanis]

Has there even been anymore news on this reboot?

[Gabe99]

From Variety:
Fox sets 'Fantastic' reboot - Akiva Goldsman has been set as producer (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118007959.html?categoryid=13&cs=1)




While Disney lays down a $4 billion bet on the future of Marvel's superheroes, 20th Century Fox has already begun overhauling one of its big Marvel franchises, "Fantastic Four," to take the property beyond the two films already made.

Akiva Goldsman has been hired to oversee the reboot as producer. Michael Green, the co-exec producer of TV's "Heroes" who co-wrote "Green Lantern," will write the script for the new "Fantastic Four."

Fox wouldn't comment on its plans, but the moves are evidence that Marvel franchises do have enduring lifespans.

As "Spider-Man 4" moves toward an early 2010 production start, Columbia Pictures recently hired James Vanderbilt to write a fifth and sixth installment with the understanding that one or both of those films would give the franchise a makeover with a new director and cast (Daily Variety, Aug. 16).

The 2005 "Fantastic Four" and 2007 sequel "Rise of the Silver Surfer" were directed by Tim Story and starred Ioan Gruffudd, Jessica Alba, Chris Evans and Michael Chiklis. Since the deals for the reboot are just getting made, it is unclear if any of them will return.

Though Marvel Entertainment owns and finances properties like "Iron Man" and "Thor," Fox controls "Fantastic Four" in perpetuity -- as long as it continues making the films. Fox has the same arrangement on Marvel Comics properties "X-Men," "Daredevil" and "Silver Surfer." Marvel is a producer and financial participant through a licensing agreement.

Though the related Silver Surfer character soared in the "Fantastic Four" sequel, that iconic personality has remained a priority project for his own film at the studio.

Fox has so far done one "X-Men" spinoff in "Wolverine." The studio is working on a sequel to that film and has scripts for "X-Men Origins: First Class," and "X-Men Origins: Magneto." Potential spinoffs for the Gambit and Deadpool characters have also been discussed.

As producer, Goldsman is involved with several DC Comics transfers, including "Jonah Hex," "The Losers" and "Teen Titans." He was also producer of the Will Smith-Charlize Theron superhero film "Hancock," for which a sequel is being developed.

[Cloudman]

How about a Zack Snyder FF reboot?

[Frank]

Akiva Goldsman has been hired to oversee the reboot as producer

Remember folks, that's the same guy that wrote Batman & Robin.

[Jmacq1]

This is the near-term side-effect of the Disney/Marvel merger. Fox will crank out a crapload more X-Men (and spinoffs) and Fantastic Four (and spinoffs) movies (and probably Daredevil as well) to bleed those franchises completely dry, because once it goes back to Disney, they ain't getting them back.

Likewise Sony will probably make a half-dozen more Spider-Man flicks. Basically both studios will make the movies until they become unprofitable/lose most of their popularity, then let the licenses revert back to Disney, leaving them with franchises that they'll have to avoid using for at least a few years before rebooting.

It's basically because if Disney were to get ahold of these franchises and make them even more profitable than (especially) Fox, it'd look bad for Fox. So Fox won't let that happen.

Sony not so much, because they've already been wildly successful with Spider-Man. Fox and their properties have been successful...but not amazingly so.

[Sighphi]

And they should hire an actual white chick to play Sue Storm.

[Iron_Stark]

With Fox doing the reboot, it's going to fail again.

[pariah-1972]

Does anyone have any suggestions about who should direct this new one?

[Phil Clark]

Micheal Bay!!!!!



























J/K:rolleyes:

[Superbeast]

Does anyone have any suggestions about who should direct this new one?

I'd like to see James Cameron have a pop at it, to be honest, he has a record for success when it comes to handling sci-fi properties while making them accessible to the the general public. I also think his name was in the mix at the same time as Columbus' back in the 90s.

[Aubergine~!]

Does anyone have any suggestions about who should direct this new one?

Joel Schumacher.

Come on, they've already got Akiva Goldman on board. What better way to ruin the franchise before it goes back to Disney?

[Phil Clark]

I also think his name was in the mix at the same time as Columbus' back in the 90s.

As I heard it, he managed to see the Wes Craven version of FF and said to the studio, "give me a real budget, and I will give you a real movie".

Cameron's Fantastic Four would have to be retitled though, to "Freakin' Unbelievably AWESOME Four".

[Shellhead]

I'd like to see James Cameron have a pop at it, to be honest, he has a record for success when it comes to handling sci-fi properties while making them accessible to the the general public. I also think his name was in the mix at the same time as Columbus' back in the 90s.

James Cameron hasn't done anything good since the first season of Dark Angel, and that was more than 8 years ago.

[Michael P]

How about a Zack Snyder FF reboot?

No thanks. We've already had two FF movies that sucked.

Of course, doing a reboot with Goldsman at the helm is like trying to cure cancer with an injection of syphilis.

[Black Atom]

And they should hire an actual white chick to play Sue Storm.

Heh. People who think reasons like this or the fact that Galactus was a cloud is what's wrong with the FF movies deserve films that suck. And comics for that matter.

I thought the two FF movies were okay, really. They did a good job of focusing on what makes the characters tick and their relationships with eachother, even if it was a bit shallow. And it was fun to boot. I think the serious problem with both movies is that the conflicts seemed sorta weak in both cases, as in they seemed to be over as quickly as they began.

The thing you have to realize about the Galactus story is that it's an end of the world story that's resolved by a deus ex machina. The real interesting bit of story is people coming to terms with the end of the world and the Silver Surfer turning into Jesus--notice none of that really has anything to do with Galactus looking like a giant white man in purple. In fact, as a cloud-thing he's probably more effective.

[pariah-1972]

Heh. People who think reasons like this or the fact that Galactus was a cloud is what's wrong with the FF movies deserve films that suck. And comics for that matter.

I thought the two FF movies were okay, really. They did a good job of focusing on what makes the characters tick and their relationships with eachother, even if it was a bit shallow. And it was fun to boot. I think the serious problem with both movies is that the conflicts seemed sorta weak in both cases, as in they seemed to be over as quickly as they began.

The thing you have to realize about the Galactus story is that it's an end of the world story that's resolved by a deus ex machina. The real interesting bit of story is people coming to terms with the end of the world and the Silver Surfer turning into Jesus--notice none of that really has anything to do with Galactus looking like a giant white man in purple. In fact, as a cloud-thing he's probably more effective.Maybe you can explain to us how a giant cloud thing is capable of eating worlds and making heralds like Silver Surfer?

[Frank]

No thanks. We've already had two FF movies that sucked.

Of course, doing a reboot with Goldsman at the helm is like trying to cure cancer with an injection of syphilis.

ha ha ha ha

[Black Atom]

Maybe you can explain to us how a giant cloud thing is capable of eating worlds and making heralds like Silver Surfer?

Just because it's a cloud doesn't mean it can't be some form of sentient organism. It's obvious something spacy and far beyond our reckoning. Hell, it worked in Star Trek.

[Jared]

It's all in the execution. The movie Galactus is actually less a deviation from the original concept than Warren Ellis' Ulimate version. Yet, Gah Lak Tus was more threatening and more of an epic event. It's all in the execution.

[Hoss]

A combination of Lee's, Waid and Byrne's run would be nice. There is great deal to look at in the relationships and pathos of these characters while making this a sci-fi exploration series. Every FF adventure I've ever loved has involved them going off to space, to a lost civilization, another dimension, or back/forwards in time.

[Steffen]

Sigh... so Fox has rushed out their announcement that FF will be rebooted and they will continue to make films as long as possible. God, I was really hoping Marvel would re-acquire the rights and make a real FF film that would be part of their cinematic Marvel Universe. I really hope we don't have to suffer through another tepid outing from Fox like the last 2 attempts.:frown:

[monkeypool]

Sigh... so Fox has rushed out their announcement that FF will be rebooted and they will continue to make films as long as possible. God, I was really hoping Marvel would re-acquire the rights and make a real FF film that would part of their cinematic Marvel Universe. I really hope we don't have to suffer through another tepid outing from Fox like the last 2 attempts.:frown:

Sigh...
Yet another horrible FF movie coming soon to a theatre near you.
Why?
Did it even really sell that well?
I'm not even a big fan of the FF and I was heartbroken over the awful treatment they recieved in those pathetic excuses for movies.

[Talisman]

They sold pretty well, even though the acting was abysmal in both. The Torch was the only character that was half-way competent in the flicks.

[Spidey616]

Third time's the charm right? :rolleyes:

[Lord S]

Aside from Dr. Doom and Galactus, I didn't think the FF movies were that bad. The Silver Surfer was portrayed exceptionally well.

Those movies did better internationally compared to domestically. I thought they were rolling along with plans for a third one. Why reboot it?

[HeckBoy]

Yeah, those FF films were a real disappointment. Can't say I'm all too optimistic about a reboot, but I guess this'll give them another chance to hopefully do things right (and as much as I love looking at Jessica Alba, she does not look good as a platinum blonde, and she certainly can not play Susan).

[Steffen]

What really upsets me is that with X-Men 3, Wolverine and the two FF films, it's clear that Fox is just looking to capitalise on the popularity of the genre in the cheapest way possible. They clearly have little interest in making creatively fulfilling pieces that will garner massive fan support, thereby ensuring longevity of the franchise.

I've always said that the FF film should have been as popular as Spider-Man is. These were characters that EVERYBODY around the planet knew, just like with Spidey and the Hulk. And what do they do? Hire a weak director like Tim Story and saddle him with a tepid script that totally ruined what should have been the biggest baddie this side of Darth Vader: Dr Doom. As much as I like Ioan Gruffud, I feel the weak script did not give him enough solid material to really BE Reed Richards, and let's face it, Ioan looks like he stepped out of a John Byrne drawing. They blew it with him. Jessica Alba was totally miscast, no offence to her. Chiklis and Evans were the only saving grace in both films.

And let's not get started on Galactus...:tongue:

What pisses me off more is that Fox will probably go full steam ahead with a Daredevil reboot as well.

[Monty_Cristo]

Matthew Fox should play Reed. he's got that potentially geeky (but passably handsome) adventurer look to him.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2734131968/nm0289142

don't worry. i won't suggest Nestor Carbonell for Doom.

[Iron Maiden]

I think there is some kind of time limit between movies that has to be met. I thought I rmembered reading somewhere that they have to have something in production by 2011 or thereabouts in order to hold onto the rights. Disney should just pay them not to do it. :tongue:

[Arachnid]

Just because it's a cloud doesn't mean it can't be some form of sentient organism. It's obvious something spacy and far beyond our reckoning. Hell, it worked in Star Trek.From what I heard, Galactus wasn't really even a space cloud in the movie. He was they fireball looking organism within the cloud. The cloud was just the machine he used to drain the planet.


It's all in the execution. The movie Galactus is actually less a deviation from the original concept than Warren Ellis' Ultimate version. Yet, Gah Lak Tus was more threatening and more of an epic event. It's all in the execution.I agree with this. And technically, this version wasn't even that much of a deviation from the 616 version. 616 Galactus isn't really a giant purple dude. Basically, different species see him differently because no one can really comprehend what they're seeing when they look at Galactus. For example, the Skrull's see a version of Galactus that is similar to what the humans see, except he's a Skrull in purple armor. From what I heard, there was even a species that saw him as a sentient space cloud.

[steveg887]

Is there anyway that they can reboot the whole franchise while still keeping on Chris Evans as Johnny Storm?

In a perfect world, he and Chiklis would stay on, and Alexis Denisof and Gretchen Mol would be cast as Reed and Sue.

[CaptainOtter]

Well, the movies did decently well. It's not like the first Hulk, where after a good opening weekend it plummeted. They wern't smash hits, but they made money. The first one did well enough to get a sequel after all.

Honestly, this reboot feels wrong. It feels like they're rebooting it for the sake of rebooting it and doing something new. It's almost as if they're pressing the "do-over" button, and feel almost immature. Like something all of us used to do when we were losing in a videogame.

I kind of wish they had waited longer before doing this. I think Fox COULD do a good job, and the movie could be great. But right now, I'm just not feeling confident.

[Sighphi]

Sigh... so Fox has rushed out their announcement that FF will be rebooted and they will continue to make films as long as possible. God, I was really hoping Marvel would re-acquire the rights and make a real FF film that would be part of their cinematic Marvel Universe. I really hope we don't have to suffer through another tepid outing from Fox like the last 2 attempts.:frown:

News of an FF reboot and a possible DD one have been out since March.
What they did now is release info of who is attached to the project.

[Monty_Cristo]

i feel bad for Evans. he clearly did the job they hired him for. he was more believable as Johnny than Tobey was as Peter (imo). but his chances of being kept around after a reboot are slim. so there goes his easiest shot at stardom. anyway, i still think Matthew Fox (1966) should be Reed. Gruffod (sp?) wasn't much a draw. i doubt there were many who could even pronounce his name. he looked like Reed but wasn't charismatic or memorable, at all. Fox at least has a familiar face because of 'Lost.' and he's more in line w/ Reed's less nerdy depiction in the current run. as for Doom, Nestor Carbonell or Rufus Sewell maybe. i chose them because of the eyes; very important when the character is wearing a metal mask.
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm149459968/nm0004801
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2465502208/nm0001722

one thing i didn't like about McMahon was that he wasn't very intimidating. he didn't look like someone who could express hatred with just a glance. and he was a little too slick. Carbonell (1967) and Sewell (1967)can do this. Ralph Fiennes (1962) also has that quality but i don't think he's the right age.

Sue's going to be a little harder to cast; as will a new Johnny. has to be someone w/ a little more depth i'm guessing (if they go with a more serious tone). Chad Michael Murray and Elisha Cuthbert? :shrugs:

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1451989248/nm0614877
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0193846/

[TheRookie311]

I was ok with the first one. Didn't see the other or others, if there was some. Jessica Alba looked good to me lol. Didn't think the acting was bad either other than a few weird moments. The storyline was what I thought was horrible. Hard to act when the story is bad.

[Ite]

They were both ok and modest hits. Just end the franchise for now. A reboot? Why just why?

[NickFury90]

Fox: No, go fuck yourself Disney. We're keeping these damn films.

I still think the actors who played The Thing/The Human Flame were awesome.

[Lord S]

They were both ok and modest hits. Just end the franchise for now. A reboot? Why just why?
Possibly as a way to incorporate them into the new shared movie universe they're trying to create. Maybe then they can bring in Galactus the way he was meant to be brought in.

I just hope they keep the same actor for the Silver Surfer.

[Brother Justin Crowe]

Reed...Mark Sheppard (Dollhouse, Battlestar Galactica, Firefly)
Johnny...Jared Padalecki (Supernatural)
Sue...Rachel McAdams (Sherlock Holmes)
Ben...John Scurti (Rescue Me)
Doom...Ian McShane (Deadwood, Kings)
Namor...Jamie Bamber (Battlestar Galactica)

[Sabrinaset]

They sold pretty well, even though the acting was abysmal in both. The Torch was the only character that was half-way competent in the flicks.

No love for Chiklis? I thought he absolutely nailed it as the Thing! Heck, I thought he was the best part of the first movie, actually.

[Iron Maiden]

I agree that there should be some way to keep Evans and Chiklis ... they had more chemistry than Gruffudd and Alba . I agree with Monty's choice on Rufus Sewell for Doom but I wonder if any actor would want a part where you won't really see them for most of the movie. The combination of CGI and Doug on the Surfer shows that you could go nuts with some other FF characters too. But they really need to work on Reed's stretching powers. They didn't come off very well at all.

The key will be the director and the script. Tim Story was OK for the comedy moments but he is just out of his depth with the rest of it. And hire JMS for the script instead since he's got some cred in Hollywood.

[Frank]

Matthew Fox should play Reed. he's got that potentially geeky (but passably handsome) adventurer look to him.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2734131968/nm0289142

don't worry. i won't suggest Nestor Carbonell for Doom.

Not bad. Although I find him rather....ordinary. Reed Richards should command respect. He's charismatic and smart and the FF are celebrities. Reed is a mix of John and Robert Kennedy.

Jon Hamm for Reed.

[The Master Meglomaniac]

They were both ok and modest hits. Just end the franchise for now. A reboot? Why just why?

No both movies were crap, they have very low scores on Rotten tomatoes. These movies are a bad representation of the FF so a reboot is necessary, just one without Fox.

The reason why Fox is making a reboot, to keep Disney from getting the rights. Its very cynical. I hope Disney's crack team of lawyers can break this agreement and get the rights back.

[Frank]

By the writer of Batman & Robin and Lost in Space.

[Sean Whitmore]

Well played, Fox. Well played.


SEAN

[atonibay]

I really don't like the FF movie. It is boring to watch. No need to reboot it.
___________________________

funbrain (http://www.funbrainworld.com/)

[Kasper Cole]

lol @ so many people asking why they're doing a reboot. They're doing a reboot because of Iron Man and The Dark Knight.

I don't care what anybody says those X-men films were shitty adaptations. They made 4 Wolverine movies featuring characters from the X-men. They focused on one character not realizing one of the best things about the X-Men is that there are so many great characters and you don't have to focus on JUST one of them, any one of them can be left out and the movie could STILL be great.

The Fantastic Four films screwed up because they clearly didn't respect the source material (same could be said about X-Men films too). They just saw it as an easy way to pump out merchandise, the stories were clearly an after thought and changed things because they felt the audience wouldn't get it otherwise.

Iron Man and The Dark Knight showed how to do Superhero films the correct way. Take the casting process seriously, respect the source material as much as possible, and not dumbing anything down for audiences.

[Sean Whitmore]

That's a refreshingly sunny outlook, but I'd have a hard time believing “Let’s do it right this time!” is the principal motivation behind this.


SEAN

[StoneGold]

Not bad. Although I find him rather....ordinary. Reed Richards should command respect. He's charismatic and smart and the FF are celebrities. Reed is a mix of John and Robert Kennedy.

Jon Hamm for Reed.

He's the Professor from Gilligan's Island.

[Jmacq1]

Possibly as a way to incorporate them into the new shared movie universe they're trying to create. Maybe then they can bring in Galactus the way he was meant to be brought in.

I just hope they keep the same actor for the Silver Surfer.

The Fantastic Four cannot currently be part of the "shared Marvel Universe" that includes Iron Man and the Avengers characters, because Fantastic Four is being made by Fox, not Marvel Studios/Disney.

Now what's interesting/amusing is that Fox actually has the licenses to make their own somewhat-competing "shared universe" if they wanted to combine the X-Men and Fantastic Four characters. Of course, that's not the most "natural" combination, and would probably be reduced to cameos/easter-egg kind of things rather than a full-fledged crossover. You could have Wolverine show up and play poker with Thing, for example. But I doubt Fox will get organized enough to even attempt something like this.


That's a refreshingly sunny outlook, but I'd have a hard time believing “Let’s do it right this time!” is the principal motivation behind this.


SEAN

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's a lot more like "Let's milk this license till it's dry so that it's worthless when we give it back to Disney/Marvel!"

[Jmacq1]

James Cameron hasn't done anything good since the first season of Dark Angel, and that was more than 8 years ago.

Beyond that, James Cameron seems far more interested in working on his own properties than piggybacking on someone else's.

[Will.S]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's a lot more like "Let's milk this license till it's dry so that it's worthless when we give it back to Disney/Marvel!"
Very much so.

It's a shame that FOX still retains the rights to Daredevil, FF, and the X-Men because they seem content to keep cranking out mediocre movies with little attempt to go the full mile by hiring these "cheap" directors like Tim Story and Gavin Hood that know little of the source material and aren't capable enough to fully translate it well on screen. X-Men just kind of falls in the middle with Wolverine having too much spotlight at the detriment of the other characters.

As long as the movies continue making money FOX is just going to keep making them so I hope the FF and X-Men movies bomb at a certain point so that Marvel/Disney can get the rights again somehow.

[Talisman]

I hope whoever they have this time, they'll make it even more COSMIC than before. The Silver Surfer one was a nice step, but this movie franchise should be WTFISGOINGONHERE?!!!?

[vitruvian]

Agreed that Evans and Chiklis nailed it, although if they can't have Chiklis reprise the Thing the absolute perfect choice is Ron Perlman. I've like Gruffudd and Alba in other things, but they had absolutely no chemistry or spark in the FF movies for some reason, and McMahon was just way too smarmy for words as Doom, coming off as a spoiled brat more than a real threat of any kind.

[celticguy]

Is there anyway that they can reboot the whole franchise while still keeping on Chris Evans as Johnny Storm?

In a perfect world, he and Chiklis would stay on, and Alexis Denisof and Gretchen Mol would be cast as Reed and Sue.

Denisof would be aa great Reed, Mol might be a little to old for Susan but not a horrible call.

[Talisman]

McMahon was ABYSMAL in FF. Main dislike for both movies.

[celticguy]

lol @ so many people asking why they're doing a reboot. They're doing a reboot because of Iron Man and The Dark Knight.

I don't care what anybody says those X-men films were shitty adaptations. They made 4 Wolverine movies featuring characters from the X-men. They focused on one character not realizing one of the best things about the X-Men is that there are so many great characters and you don't have to focus on JUST one of them, any one of them can be left out and the movie could STILL be great.

The Fantastic Four films screwed up because they clearly didn't respect the source material (same could be said about X-Men films too). They just saw it as an easy way to pump out merchandise, the stories were clearly an after thought and changed things because they felt the audience wouldn't get it otherwise.

Iron Man and The Dark Knight showed how to do Superhero films the correct way. Take the casting process seriously, respect the source material as much as possible, and not dumbing anything down for audiences.

and yet they all made money. I am not sure IM respected the source material or Hulk for that matter. A good story is a good story is a good story that is all movie goers want most of them have no idea what is going on in the comics anyway.

The Hulk reboot made the franchise more popular so did the Batman so why not take soemthing that is making a profit and see if you can make it into a big windfall.

[SydneyFalco]

I didn't like the fims at all. I wouldn't call them OK cause I've never felt the need to rewatch either of them, ever. On the other hand, I gave it a little thought yesterday and I'm not sure that the FF work all that well as a film property. Other random thoughts:

Mister Fantastic has a ludicrous "power" that even in the comics feels a little more appropriate for a "funny book" idea of a superhero, rather than the current fashion of taking superheroes seriously. Also, the coolest thing about him, how much smarter he is than the rest of the MU, is taken away by a self-incapsulated film in which there are no other superheroes and no giant super-science community. Pains should be taken to establish that he (and Doom) are held in awe, more than little in fear, that their rivalry makes the world nervous, and that they're quantum years ahead of normal science.

It's somehow easier to believe a lone vigilante might dress up and prance around, but a group of related folks? Unless handled with a great deal of wit, it tends to stray into satire. I think an emphasis on their being a Jonny Quest-like group of super-science explorers, not strictly speaking super-heroes, is a must. As is the cosmic nature of their adventures. De-spandexing their costumes, even moreso than they did with X-men, would be advisable.

I think if they reboot, they should do it a la Incredible Hulk, with no attempt at more origin business. Sue should have a baby at the outset. (Granted, one that gets left behind during their trip to the negative zone, or whatever). It helps distinguish the unique nature of their family situation. I also (rather immediately) thought of Rachel MacAdams as Sue.

The Thing has to be CG. I'm not a CG nut or anything. I just don't find that a suit can give the rocks the right look.

[Jmacq1]

I hated Doom in the FF movies, but the main problem with Doom is that to non comic reading audiences that haven't grown up with it, his origin is absolutely, positively ridiculous.

He's a gypsy-supergenius-sorcerer who's got a lifelong obsession with hating the only guy on the planet as smart/smarter than he is because he got a little scar on his face in college after the guy pointed out a mistake that Doom himself had made.

In fact, he got so obsessive about it that he ran off to Tibet and met a group of techno-monks(?!?) that created a suit of super-armor for him and demanded to put the red-hot mask on his face because he was too impatient to wait for it to cool off. Oh, and then he went back and conquered his home country.

Yeah, kind of convoluted to try to boil down into a subplot in a two hour long movie.

[Kasper Cole]

and yet they all made money. I am not sure IM respected the source material or Hulk for that matter. A good story is a good story is a good story that is all movie goers want most of them have no idea what is going on in the comics anyway.

The Hulk reboot made the franchise more popular so did the Batman so why not take soemthing that is making a profit and see if you can make it into a big windfall.

The fox movies all made money but none of them did as well as Iron Man or The Dark Knight at the box office and none of fox's films got nearly as much critical acclaim.

And notice I said respected the source material, they weren't slaves to it and didn't poke fun at it constantly or make totally unneeded changes to major elements.

[Kaos]

They need to keep Evans and Chiklis on as Johnny and Ben.

[SydneyFalco]

I hated Doom in the FF movies, but the main problem with Doom is that to non comic reading audiences that haven't grown up with it, his origin is absolutely, positively ridiculous.

Yeah, kind of convoluted to try to boil down into a subplot in a two hour long movie.

True enough. The sorcery sort of has to get left behind, or the waters become too muddied. Unless you did a Doom movie. It wouldn't be successful, they'd never do it, but I'd sure want to see one.

[The Xenos]

Blech. Having the asshat who wrote Batman and Robin isn't a good sign. I don't care if he somehow won an Oscar later (with a questionably accurate biopic at that). If you write turds like that and others, it's a permanent stain on your record. Hell, what's next? Hiring Jon Peters to remake Daredevil. ("Does he have to wear red? Sounds too faggy. He's blind? Eh. That's been done. Let's make him deaf.")

Meanwhile, save for Sue and Doom, I thought the casting was quite good. Too bad the movies were just 'meh'. Plus I think Galactus, while not ruining the movie, was a travesty. It was a dumb studio exsec decision. Kinda like taking away Superman's cape. Sure, the story doesn't need it, but why change it? If you;re going to adapt something, actually use the material. And you can't tell me a fully detailed Kirby accurate Galactus wouldn't have been an amazing sight on screen. You simply cannot argue that a cloud that seems from some generic space movie that we've seen a thousand times is somehow better.

[Monty_Cristo]

I hated Doom in the FF movies, but the main problem with Doom is that to non comic reading audiences that haven't grown up with it, his origin is absolutely, positively ridiculous.

He's a gypsy-supergenius-sorcerer who's got a lifelong obsession with hating the only guy on the planet as smart/smarter than he is because he got a little scar on his face in college after the guy pointed out a mistake that Doom himself had made.

In fact, he got so obsessive about it that he ran off to Tibet and met a group of techno-monks(?!?) that created a suit of super-armor for him and demanded to put the red-hot mask on his face because he was too impatient to wait for it to cool off. Oh, and then he went back and conquered his home country.

Yeah, kind of convoluted to try to boil down into a subplot in a two hour long movie.

maybe the only option is to go the animated/Pixar route. when you think about it, the fantasy elements of what you wrote above kind of work in an animated universe; where reality is already a little skewed. they could introduce the animated Fantastic Four as already being celebrities in their world. they could tell their origin through a quick flashback. and introduce the one guy who can hold a candle to Mister Fantastic because he incorporates sorcery into his tech. to me, the inherent sillyness of it is acceptable if they look like Pixar-animated characters (ex. Monsters vs Aliens).

[noh-varr]

maybe the only option is to go the animated/Pixar route. when you think about it, the fantasy elements of what you wrote above kind of work in an animated universe; where reality is already a little skewed. they could introduce the animated Fantastic Four as already being celebrities in their world. they could tell their origin through a quick flashback. and introduce the one guy who can hold a candle to Mister Fantastic because he incorporates sorcery into his tech. to me, the inherent sillyness of it is acceptable if they look like Pixar-animated characters (ex. Monsters vs Aliens).

But then everyone (including me) will ask... why didn't they make the Incredible 2 instead?

[Monty_Cristo]

But then everyone (including me) will ask... why didn't they make the Incredible 2 instead?

there was a lady in my office who thought the first Fantastic Four flick was a live-action Incredibles movie.

[Sean Whitmore]

I hated Doom in the FF movies, but the main problem with Doom is that to non comic reading audiences that haven't grown up with it, his origin is absolutely, positively ridiculous.

He's a gypsy-supergenius-sorcerer who's got a lifelong obsession with hating the only guy on the planet as smart/smarter than he is because he got a little scar on his face in college after the guy pointed out a mistake that Doom himself had made.

In fact, he got so obsessive about it that he ran off to Tibet and met a group of techno-monks(?!?) that created a suit of super-armor for him and demanded to put the red-hot mask on his face because he was too impatient to wait for it to cool off. Oh, and then he went back and conquered his home country.

Yeah, kind of convoluted to try to boil down into a subplot in a two hour long movie.


A lot of that is completely unnecessary, though; at least for a first movie.

Leave out the gypsies and the sorcery, maybe even the monks. Go with the college accident wrecking Doom's face instead of the years-later retcon that it was only slightly scarred. And you're left with a psycho-arrogant supergenius obsessed with Reed for (in his mind) sabotaging his life.

And anyone who has a problem with super armor in a movie about comic-book heroes needs to be beaten with an oar and left in the woods.


SEAN

[Jmacq1]

Nah, it's not the Super-Armor that's a problem. It's the combination of all the different elements that'd have people scratching their heads. I'm sure there are ways around it, but the comic movies seem to have the obsessive need to explain in (relative) detail the origins of all their characters. Usually to the point of making the whole first movie an extended origin story.

Anywho, this won't be a Pixar film. Fox still holds the rights, not Disney, and I could be wrong but I don't think Fox has a particularly well-developed CG animated movie branch.

[Hypestyle]

I hope that Disney buys out Fox with FF/Surfer and Daredevil/elektra.. the films produced were, IMO, fine, but it's time to move on.. I think a new FF film should not be an origin film, and get into darker territory.. also have a robot-suit/CGI Thing this time around..

villains- Mole Man, Annhilus, Terminus, Skrulls, Maximus..

[Monty_Cristo]

i've done this before but this is my idea for another Fantastic Four flick. some rogue researchers/tech speciliasts (w/ the sensibilities of pirates/mercenaries) are hired by the Gideon Trust to investigate a rift in time space (perhaps caused by one of Reed's side experiments or something he's researching as well). the Gideon Trust's plan is for this small group (somewhat recognizable as a Frightful Four to comic book readers) to find some way of widening the dimensional hole & find something worthy of exploitation inside. this is obviously very risky; like it could potentially destroy the planet. Reed, realizing this, gets the Fantastic Four involved. to throw fuel on the fire, the Frightful Four plan to open the dimensional hole with a device they steal from the Baxter Building.

the "Frightful Four" accidentally unleash the Inhumans; a very small & struggling civilization that has been mutated by continuous exposure to the strange atmosphere of what Reed has dubbed the Negative Zone. the Inhumans initially come to blows w/ the Four before escaping into New York City; but are eventually tracked down. the two forces are forced to team together when Annihilus, a destructive creature that has seen the Inhumans as prey over the years, also makes his way through the portal. they managed to drive him through the portal; the Inhumans following. the Frightful Four make a last ditch effort to take their ball & go home. they are stopped. Bentley Wittman, the "Wizard" of Wallstreet, is bullied into revealing their backer. turns out the Gideon Trust is a dummy corporation (literally staffed by lifelike automatons). the real benefactor of this operation is an old friend from Latveria. quickly segue to the Fantastic Four crash landing in front of Castle Doom. once inside, they see that Doom has a replica of the dimensional barrier opening machine built inside of his castle. the four wade through his robotic imitations only to just miss him as Doom esacpes into the Negative Zone. this of course would lead to another movie in which they follow him.

[Shellhead]

If only somebody would re-boot Fox.

[Monty_Cristo]

If only somebody would re-boot Fox.

already happened. it's why i can't watch the Tracy Ulman show anymore. it's also why Married w/ Children slowly became unfunny.

[kalorama]

And they should hire an actual white chick to play Sue Storm.

The first I heard about Jessica Alba being Latina was when the online bitchfest started after she was cast. I'd bet that the majority of nonf-anboys who saw the movie neither knew nor cared.

[Jmacq1]

I hope that Disney buys out Fox with FF/Surfer and Daredevil/elektra.. the films produced were, IMO, fine, but it's time to move on.. I think a new FF film should not be an origin film, and get into darker territory.. also have a robot-suit/CGI Thing this time around..

villains- Mole Man, Annhilus, Terminus, Skrulls, Maximus..

It's not worth it for Disney to buy back the licenses. They just spent 4 billion on Marvel. I doubt they're looking to shell out potentially hundreds of millions more buying back licenses. Disney will still get the licensing fees from all their licensed-out properties, so they're still making some money off of them regardless of the studio that's producing them.

[David Walton]

A combination of Lee's, Waid and Byrne's run would be nice. There is great deal to look at in the relationships and pathos of these characters while making this a sci-fi exploration series. Every FF adventure I've ever loved has involved them going off to space, to a lost civilization, another dimension, or back/forwards in time.

You know, that would be my hope for both the FF franchise and the Superman reboot. A different approach, mind you, but I do wish they'd go wild with sci-fi elements of both series.

[Tobias March]

The first I heard about Jessica Alba being Latina was when the online bitchfest started after she was cast. I'd bet that the majority of nonf-anboys who saw the movie neither knew nor cared.

Well yes. It was entirely ridiculous.

John Byrne....birther of unfortunate memes....

[Monty_Cristo]

i just remember looking odd as a blonde. that is what made me question the casting.

[Hoss]

i just remember looking odd as a blonde. that is what made me question the casting.

And the thing is, there was absolutely no reason to make her a blue eyed blonde other than that is the way Kirby first drew her almost 50 years ago.

But if you wanted to go with the classic look, there are plenty of good actresses that could fit that look. It just seemed like a stunt casting.

BTW, this is what I picture classic Sue looking like

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/247/6a00d8341c630a53ef00e54.jpg (http://img402.imageshack.us/i/6a00d8341c630a53ef00e54.jpg/)

[pariah-1972]

And the thing is, there was absolutely no reason to make her a blue eyed blonde other than that is the way Kirby first drew her almost 50 years ago.

But if you wanted to go with the classic look, there are plenty of good actresses that could fit that look. It just seemed like a stunt casting.

BTW, this is what I picture classic Sue looking like

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/247/6a00d8341c630a53ef00e54.jpg (http://img402.imageshack.us/i/6a00d8341c630a53ef00e54.jpg/)Who be that?

[Hoss]

Who be that?

The character is Betty Draper on AMC's Mad Men. The actress is January Jones.

Along the Madmen vein, if they went for a more serious, dramatic FF flick, John Hamm (Don Draper) has shown the chops to play a very good Reed.

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/3559/jonhamm.jpg (http://img142.imageshack.us/i/jonhamm.jpg/)

[pariah-1972]

The character is Betty Draper on AMC's Mad Men. The actress is January Jones.

Along the Madmen vein, if they went for a more serious, dramatic FF flick, John Hamm (Don Draper) has shown the chops to play a very good Reed.

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/3559/jonhamm.jpg (http://img142.imageshack.us/i/jonhamm.jpg/)I've been meaning to watch that show when does it come on?

[The Xenos]

I just caught up on Mad Men. I loved it. Plus I reccomended it to a friend and he loved it. I actually got it for Christmas for antoher friend because I saw it becauese I heard it weas good, the Blu-ray was on sale, and he didn't have any TV shows yet. He too loved it.

And Hamm and Jones playing Reed and Sue? I don't know if they can play a couple that struggles to stay together while the man gets way too involved in his work and won't let the woman who loves him into his mind and into his life. Though.. heh.. Reed wasn't sleeping around at the drop of a hat.

[West Mantooth]

I think Elizabeth Banks is the best person to play Sue. She's funny on her own or can play the "straight man" to a funnier person.

[Saturius]

The first I heard about Jessica Alba being Latina was when the online bitchfest started after she was cast. I'd bet that the majority of nonf-anboys who saw the movie neither knew nor cared.

Really? I'm really not trying to stir up race stuff or whatever so please forgive me for my poor wording, but to me Alba definitely doesn't look traditionally "white" in the first FF film. I think her dying her hair blonde for the film just made it even more obvious to me cause it really clashed with her darker skin tone. I know she's got latino in her but even if I didn't know that then, I think still woud've come out of the theater thinking she was was mixed with something else. So she definitley didn't look the part. But then the sequel came, and my lord, she looked even worse! I applaud the filmakers for trying to make her look more like the traditional Sue in the comics, but that blonde wig, the blue eye color contacts, the huge, horrendous black colored eye makeup and again the blonde hair clashing with her skin tone, just made her look terrible.

I thought her acting was sufficent and had no problems with it but I just couldn't take her seriously cause she looked so fake. It kinda took me out of the film sometimes.

[The Xenos]

I remember reading Alba being a bit of a mutt with a good dose of Latina in her. She is gorgeous as she was. So why she and the studio wanted to make her blonde haired blue eyed is beyond me. It looked freaky even as an Alba fan.

[Gabe99]

From Motion Captured: Fox officially announces 'Fantastic Four' reboot (http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-6-motion-captured/posts/fox-officially-announces-fantastic-four-reboot)


Herc over at AICN suggested Jeff Goldblum for Reed Richards and Christoph Waltz for Dr. Doom.

I concur. Waltz for Doom? Concur, concur, concur.



I think that if you're going to really do "Fantastic Four" and you want it to be fun, you go period. And you go cosmic. You go Kirby and Lee. You go space monsters and mole men. You don't shrink away from it. And you find a filmmaker who is up to that task, and who appreciates HOW INCREDIBLY FUN that can be. Pop optimism. Lighter than air. Adventure. That's "Fantastic Four" in my book. That's what I'd love to see.

I think a retro FF movie could work.

[AllisterH]

THere is no reason a pastiche of the FF (The Incredibles) should be so much better than the originators.

[pariah-1972]

THere is no reason a pastiche of the FF (The Incredibles) should be so much better than the originators.Well it was a big budget animated movie by Pixar so there's little budget constraints compared to a live action film.

Also just looking at who the director was for the Films could tell you it was all wrong.

[Gabe99]

From IGN:
F4 Reboot Dream Cast (http://movies.ign.com/articles/102/1021635p1.html)




The Director

Let's face it: almost any director would be a step-up from Tim Story at this point. We kicked around a number of candidates -- Robert Rodriguez, who's handled family-oriented genre adventure films before with the Spy Kids series; Tony Scott, who has directed a number of action films such as Top Gun, Crimson Tide, Man on Fire; and McG, who might have been a decent choice for this had he not mucked up Terminator Salvation -- before settling on British filmmaker Matthew Vaughn.

Vaughn, who directed Layer Cake and Stardust, has so far been a bridesmaid and never a bride when it comes to Marvel Comics adaptations. He'd been attached to helm both X-Men: The Last Stand and Thor before dropping out of each project. We think it's time to finally give this guy a shot at bringing a Marvel title to the screen. Vaughn's next release is the comic book adaptation Kick-Ass, footage from which received an enthusiastic response from fans when shown at this summer's San Diego Comic-Con.




From MTV 08/28/09:
EXCLUSIVE: Matthew Vaughn Calls 'Avengers' & 'Superman' His Dream Projects, (http://splashpage.mtv.com/2009/08/28/matthew-vaughn-calls-avengers-superman-his-dream-projects-regrets-iron-man-timing/)
Regrets 'Iron Man' Timing (http://splashpage.mtv.com/2009/08/28/matthew-vaughn-calls-avengers-superman-his-dream-projects-regrets-iron-man-timing/)

[kalorama]

Really? I'm really not trying to stir up race stuff or whatever so please forgive me for my poor wording, but to me Alba definitely doesn't look traditionally "white" in the first FF film.

And what, exactly, do "traditionally white" people look like?

[Riddles_McMurphy]

I'd like to see Bruce Greenwood play Reed Richards.

[RolandJP]

New Fantstic Four Film


Jake Gyllenhaal as Reed Richards

http://handson.provocateuse.com/images/photos/jake_gyllenhaal_01.jpg

Blake Lively As Sue Richards

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj14/little_miss_sasha/PBs/BlakeLively.jpg

Vin Diesel as The Thing

http://fa.univision.com/attachments/univision/imagenes/886791/1/VIN%20DIESEL1.jpg

Kevin Zegers as the Human Torch

http://themovie-fanatic.com/images/stories/top50_may2009/kevin-zegers.jpg

[comicsmetal]

New Fantstic Four Film


Jake Gyllenhaal as Reed Richards

http://handson.provocateuse.com/images/photos/jake_gyllenhaal_01.jpg

Blake Lively As Sue Richards

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj14/little_miss_sasha/PBs/BlakeLively.jpg

Vin Diesel as The Thing

http://fa.univision.com/attachments/univision/imagenes/886791/1/VIN%20DIESEL1.jpg

Kevin Zegers as the Human Torch

http://themovie-fanatic.com/images/stories/top50_may2009/kevin-zegers.jpg


I find it odd you put Jake Gyllenhall has Reid Richards because Gyllenhall seems too young to play Reid Richards.Also picking blak livly is kind of well meh to me.Her voice and all the moles on her body makes me gake

[Frank]

He's the Professor from Gilligan's Island.

Exactly. Reed comes from a long line of 50s/60s movie good-looking scientists that used to smoke the pipe. Those who saw those movies will get what I mean. :biggrin:

That is why Hamm is perfect.

[DrDoom616]

I think, seeing as all Marvel films seem to be using the ultimate universe as a basic for movies, that the New Fantastic Four should follow suit and have young actors play the parts anyway.

[Gabe99]

From Latino Review:
Chris Evans Looks Foward to a Fantastic Reboot (http://www.latinoreview.com/news/chris-evans-looks-foward-to-a-fantastic-reboot-7994)

When I, along with some fellow journos, recently caught up with Chris Evans, who played Johnny Storm (aka the Human Torch), he had this to say regarding his involvement and thoughts on the reboot.


I don't think I'm going to be involved with it. I think they're going to start from scratch. [...] If there's room to reinvent a franchise in a different tone and they can make a good film out of it then so be it. I have nothing negative to say about it.

[Gabe99]

From Collider: Chris Evans talks SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD and FANTASTIC FOUR Reboot (http://wizarduniverse.invisionzone.com/index.php?act=SF&s=&f=22)


Fox has gone on record now that they’re re-booting “Daredevil”. They are going to re-boot “Fantastic Four”. I have to ask you want are your thoughts on this?

Chris: I think it’s great. I’m sure it’ll be a great movie. They do that with a lot of movies. Sometimes sooner, sometimes later. “Batman”, “Superman”, “Incredible Hulk”. Sometimes it’s a 10-year gap, sometimes it’s 5-years, sometimes it’s 20-years. I think there’s room to readjust the tone in “Fantastic Four” as it was for “Batman”. You know, “Batman” took on a very cartoony feel towards the end and even in the beginning. It was a lighter movie, even though it was Tim Burton. It was still a lighter film and the newer Batman’s have just been amazing, so I’m all for good filmmaking. If they can go make a good dark edgy “Fantastic Four” right on.

A lot of fandom, myself included, liked the cast of “Fantastic Four”. That wasn’t the issue. They had an issue with the story and the tone aiming for kids. Would you object to going back to doing “Fantastic Four”, or are you sort of like I’ve done this and let’s have a new team do it?

Chris: I guess it would depend. I mean I’m never against revisiting, well I guess I should say not yet, I’m never against revisiting genres or character types. If I played a doctor in one movie I wouldn’t be against playing a doctor again if the director was the right director. I think at the end of the day you’ve got to work with the directors. I do what I do because I like making good movies. It’s fun to act but if you just loved acting alone you could sit in your room and act. You could act in a vacuum. You want to make good products. You want to make good films. I love movies and good movies come from good directors and like I said since there isn’t this massive surplus of films out there, if a good director offers you a chance to make a good movie, you take it even if you say well I just played a character like that. Who cares? You’re a great director. “Scott Pilgrim”, I played characters similar to that guy but no fucking way I’m going to say no to this guy. I’m doing your movie. So if “Fantastic Four” got rebooted and Christopher Nolan was going to direct it and said do you want to play Johnny Storm again, I’d be in those blue fucking tights.

[Frank]

I think Fox should just go ahead and make a third film with the same cast and director they had in their last two flicks. Because whatever they do, they won't be able to do better. Not because the two other movies were great-because they clearly were not-it's Fox and I can't see them ever threating a genre film properly. X-Men Origins: Wolverine was their idea of doing an art film. They hired an indie darling for director in Gavin Wood yet it came off as a piece of shit, worst than all the other X-Men films combined. I can even say that their reboot will be the most pointless thing in the history of movies because they have no idea how to do it better. So they should aim low, stick to what they were doing, maybe do some storyline where the FF fight the Frightful Four. It will have that X-Men vibe of super-heroes vs super-villains and since it's not ambitious(no big idea other than hero team fights villain team), they would have less chance to fuck things up. End the franchise with that, then let it return into Marvel's hands.

[Jared]

I think it'd be wiser to just recast Alba, get a new director, and aim for a movie that isn't so fluffy. Don't even bother with Doom this time around. Make it "Wrath of the Sub-Mariner" or "Atlantis Attacks." If they don't have the rights, then the Frightful Four and hordes interdimensional zombies could be fun. Especially if they utilize the other characters they have. Who wouldn't mark out at seeing zombie X-Men? The best part is, being zombies, the original actors wouldn't even be neccessary. Wolverine's face could be rotted away.

[Frank]

Just put Elizabeth Banks in there to replace Alba as Sue and let's go against the 616 Frightful Four. In the team, replace Sandman by Hydroman(since Sandy belong to Sony), Trapster by Puppet Master(since his daughter was in the last movie and Trapster sucks) and maybe since Frankie Raye was the soldier in the last movie that Johnny had a crush on, turn her into Nova like she was in the comic. Maybe Wizard could find an element from the Silver Surfer left in the last movie and use it to give her powers. Wizard, Hydroman, Puppet Master, Nova, there's your team. As for the plot, who gives a fk, it's Fox, it should go cheap because it could be bad and bomb. So it's super-team vs super-team. Wizard could be some sort of stalker of the FF or something.

Namor would be cool but I would never want Fox to get ahold of him. Because we're doomed if that happens.

[Frank]

How about this there's friendly competition between the two scientist Wizard(forgot the name) and Richards. But then Reed discredit him cause he feels like it's a path that may lead toward catastrophe. Wizard is disgraced, steal part of Doom's armor and tech and build himself a team to fight the Fantastics to force Reed into helping him finalizing his experiment. The Frightful Four actually wins(because of something devious, obviously). So Reed is forced to help Wizard, the result is opening a Extra(intra?)-dimensional gateway aka Negative Zone. But then the sh-- hit the fan when Blastarr comes out and go threw the portal and start causing damage in this plane of existance. So then the two teams join force to fight Blastarr and it ends when Frankie Raye sacrifice herself for the World, destroying Blastarr at the same time. Hey I said they should basically go the X-Men root to end the franchise. :biggrin:

[nieman]

I think it'd be wiser to just recast Alba, get a new director, and aim for a movie that isn't so fluffy. Don't even bother with Doom this time around. Make it "Wrath of the Sub-Mariner" or "Atlantis Attacks." If they don't have the rights, then the Frightful Four and hordes interdimensional zombies could be fun.

I agree with this. They should keep the same cast (minus Alba), get a new director and take some of the fluff out; there is no way that other actors will be able to match the chemistry Chris Evans & Michael Chikilis had anyway. They can also leave Doom out of the film and get a new villain for them....Frightful Four would do it.

[kalorama]

If they did make a movie with the original cast (and they won't) there's almost zero chance they'd ditch Alba. Despite all of the fanboy bitching, she's easily the most recognizable and marketable member of the original cast. Which is not to say that people are flocking to movies because she's in them, but her presence in the film certainly didn't hurt at the box office (again, despite all of the fanboy bitching).

[blackdragon6]

X-Men Origins: Wolverine was their idea of doing an art film. They hired an indie darling for director in Gavin Wood yet it came off as a piece of shit, in Gavin's defense he had the usual executive meddling with fox producers....

[J. Robb]

Pixar already did one great Fantastic Four film, I'd like see another one.

[Frank]

If they did make a movie with the original cast (and they won't) there's almost zero chance they'd ditch Alba. Despite all of the fanboy bitching, she's easily the most recognizable and marketable member of the original cast. Which is not to say that people are flocking to movies because she's in them, but her presence in the film certainly didn't hurt at the box office (again, despite all of the fanboy bitching).

Good point. Plus, if I i'm going to watch a fluffy piece of trash, I might as well get to see a nice piece of booty along with it.

That was my thought process when I rent Into the Blue.

[Jared]

The FF movies don't have any scenes of Alba swimming in a bikini, so she wasn't that much of a selling point. Replace her with a better, but still attractive actress, and there won't be much of an issue. Elizabeth Banks is a really good call. Offhand, I could also see Rachel McAdams or Ali Larter.

[kalorama]

And that's still fan-think. It's one thing if the filmmaker's decide to recast the whole thing and start from scratch. But, objectively, there's no good reason for them to decide that all of the cast is just fine to keep except Alba.

[The Xenos]

Watching Mad Men the other night, I got an idea. What if they did a remake set in the original 1960s timeframe?

[J. Robb]

Watching Mad Men the other night, I got an idea. What if they did a remake set in the original 1960s timeframe?
I think that'd be great. I also wanted them to set the first Spider-Man movie in 1962, but no luck there...

[Jared]

And that's still fan-think. It's one thing if the filmmaker's decide to recast the whole thing and start from scratch. But, objectively, there's no good reason for them to decide that all of the cast is just fine to keep except Alba.

Well I wouldn't sugget the put out a press release that says "we're dumping her because she sucks." But a better actress, who actually looks believable as a blonde caucasian, wouldn't be a bad idea. Especially if they want to set the movie a few years later and Franklin already around. That'd be a "reboot" of sorts, with new dynamic to Reed and Sue's relationship. But if other roles have to be recast as well, then so be it. I just think a true "reboot from scratch" is a bad idea. It's too soon. Do we really need to see a younger, fresher version of the FF's origin already?

[Jordacar]

My newest article on examiner.com:
http://www.examiner.com/x-27104-Denver-Comic-Books-Examiner~y2009m10d25-How-to-Reboot-the-Fantastic-Four-Franchise

There’s a reason it’s called “The World’s Greatest Comic Magazine.” They’re Marvel’s first great superhero team and the first great comic of the Marvel Age. But despite this the Fantastic Four have had some rotten luck in the cross-media department. In a nutshell, we have seen:

* The unreleased 1994 low budget film, which was made only so the producers could renew the copyright to the property.
* The 90’s animated series, which yielded a shallow first season and a re-tooled, highly competent second season.
* A stylish new animated series in 2006, whose future, while not officially cancelled, is in flux due to its erratic broadcasting schedule in the US.
* Two big-budget but mostly lackluster feature films from 20th Century Fox.

There are many superhero movies of the past ten years that will likely stand the test of time, but the Fantastic Four isn’t one of them. With talk already springing up from Fox about rebooting the franchise, there has been much talk from fans about what can possibly be done with Marvel’s first family of superpowered explorers/adventurers on the big screen, much concerning recasting certain characters and reworking the tone of the films. But turning this comic series into a film franchise to rival Star Trek is a bit more complicated than most people think. I’ve boiled my thoughts into six easy steps:

Step 1: WAIT
It’s been only two years since the last film was crapped into theaters, it’s way too soon to announce another movie and call it a reboot. Learn from what’s come before. The Incredible Hulk was released 5 years after Ang Lee’s Hulk, and that reboot barely broke even at the box office. The Batman franchise waited 8 long years before we got a perfect origin story and a masterpiece of a sequel.

Step 2: Get it back to Marvel
Let’s face it, Fox had their chance to make this one twice. They placed the director of Barbershop at the helm and settled for a mundane, sitcom tone for both films. And while Marvel Studios is producing masterworks like Iron Man, Fox continues to pump out disposable dreck like X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Better to let the rights lapse or just sell it back to Marvel now while the getting’s good. Surely Disney/Marvel would pay handsomely for such a classic property while giving Fox a lucrative distribution deal. Once the characters are back under the Marvel banner where they belong, it will be so much easier to:

Step 3: Ingrain it in the Marvel Universe
There are lots of excellent Marvel characters that Fox doesn’t have the rights to use in future FF sequels. With the one-two punch of Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, Marvel got to tie the elements of their superhero worlds together on the big screen for the first time in a way that wasn’t just a knowing wink to the audience, but a potent promise of further awesomeness. A new FF film within the already established Marvel world would allow for references to Tony Stark and Spider-Man, news reports from the Daily Bugle, and appearances from Nick Fury and SHIELD.

Step 4: Recast everyone. Yes, everyone.
Michael Chiklis (as Ben Grimm/The Thing) and Chris Evans (as Johnny Storm/Human Torch) were easily the brightest spots in an otherwise mediocre cast, but it’s not as though they are the only actors who can play those roles. Besides the two of them, the cast leaves much to be desired. I could write a whole article on the miscasting of Jessica Alba as Invisible Woman and how much it boggles my mind in its stupidity. What the franchise needs is a fresh start, even if that means forgetting the past and clearing away the things that were good before. And when I say a fresh start, I really mean:

Step 5: Don’t fear the Re-start
It may not seem like the most natural move, but hear me out. I know that there are plenty of good reasons to avoid retelling the Fantastic Four’s origin on film, not the least of which because we saw the origin in the 2005 film. And yet, I’d still think they should strongly consider it, given the success of Christopher Nolan’s Batman re-imagining. It is possible, while retelling the origin, to change and improve every single detail of what has previously been shown on film, even presenting it in half the time but with twice the suspense. The easiest way to put a different spin on things is to introduce Franklin Storm, the father of Johnny and Sue, into the story. He could play an integral mentoring role in the first film, then possibly die at the hands of Dr. Doom in the second, thus establishing Doom as a powerful threat. Speaking of which:

Step 6: No more Dr. Doom…for now
To be honest, this is the real reason that I long for a full page-one restart. The abysmal mishandling of Dr. Doom, one of the most revered supervillains in all of comics (right up there with the Joker, seriously), stunted the growth of the franchise more than anything else. Fox’s attempts to copy the success of the Spider-Man film franchise came to a head with Dr. Doom, who was reimagined from an armored super-genius dictator into a shallow Norman Osborn knockoff. Since the character of Doom is credited as the inspiration for Darth Vader, one can see how these changes were never going to work. Whether the next film is a full restart or not, no time should be spent trying to correct the mistakes of the past two films relating to this baddie. Instead, follow the Batman Begins model in this regard: introduce the FF in one film, have them fight some other villain (like, for example, the Mole Man and his monstrous underground minions), and throw in a tease at the end promising Dr. Doom in the sequel.
Also, a few provisions are in order concerning the character: 1) When we actually meet Doom, we must never see the disfigured face beneath his mask, 2) he must be a formidable match for the entire team (lightning from his hands gets real old real fast, people), 3) he must speak in a highly sophisticated and egocentric tone (quoting lots of classic literature as he dispenses hurt on our heroes), 4) he must have an entire fortress loaded with robots, gadgets, and an array of hero-killing hardware, 5) and he should come off as so dangerous, you’d be scared to be in the same room with him.

Although the last ten years have been fortunate for many superheroes on the big screen, the Fantastic Four seem to have come out the worst for it. Here’s hoping that these classic heroes see a dramatic turnaround in the coming years and get the big-screen treatment they truly deserve.

[StoneGold]

Step one: wait till it's out of Fox's hands. Step two: ask Brad Bird if he wants to do that live action film he's occasionally been rumored as wanting to do.

[Jmacq1]

Sadly, Fox isn't going to let this (or any of their Marvel films) lapse. Not until they've absolutely driven each franchise into the ground, and even then they'll wait the absolute longest they can wait and attempt at least one reboot.

We could easily be looking at X-Men/FF films from Fox and Spider-Man films from Sony for the next 50 years. The rights are held in perpetuity so long as they keep making movies.

[Frank]

My newest article on examiner.com:
http://www.examiner.com/x-27104-Denver-Comic-Books-Examiner~y2009m10d25-How-to-Reboot-the-Fantastic-Four-Franchise

I agree on most of the points except the "Ingrain it in the Marvel Universe". Sure it could be nice but if they reboot then examine the FF Universe first. There's so many ground, so many Worlds and Universes they should explore. And they should do it carefully too.

I think my hope for a FF franchise would be nothing more than the exact same care and ambition Peter Jackson did for the LOTR franchise. This should be the greatest super-hero story ever told, the most cosmic, the most incredible. The potential is there for it to surpass every super-hero concepts on celuloid. Even Superman and the Green Lantern corp. Because since the FF are explorers what they can do is limited only to the imagination.

As far as Doom wouldn't be nice if they could wait and wait while having him be this dark presence. You build him up slowly. I would even suggest having the FF experience countless adventures such as facing the Mole Man, underground, The Inhumans, the Skrulls, the Shiar, the Negative Zone....Galactus and then at the very end of the franchise, when they least expect it, when they're exausted, they face their deadliest threat and more personal one, Dr. Doom in the Kingdom of Latveria.

[Jordacar]

I think my hope for a FF franchise would be nothing more than the exact same care and ambition Peter Jackson did for the LOTR franchise. This should be the greatest super-hero story ever told, the most cosmic, the most incredible. The potential is there for it to surpass every super-hero concepts on celuloid. Even Superman and the Green Lantern corp. Because since the FF are explorers what they can do is limited only to the imagination.

As far as Doom wouldn't be nice if they could wait and wait while having him be this dark presence. You build him up slowly. I would even suggest having the FF experience countless adventures such as facing the Mole Man, underground, The Inhumans, the Skrulls, the Shiar, the Negative Zone....Galactus and then at the very end of the franchise, when they least expect it, when they're exausted, they face their deadliest threat and more personal one, Dr. Doom in the Kingdom of Latveria.When I was watching FF:ROTSS, I couldn't help thinking that the big screen isn't the best venue for the FF storywise. A long-running TV show is the only thing that might come close to capturing the scope of their adventures. But so far no one who made the previous shows could produce an adequate vision to keep things going beyond a season or two (although Tom Tataranowicz came pretty close on his turn.)

[Damiean Dark]

What i want to know is whos going to play doom? Julian mcmahon was absolutely terrible he was a creepy ass who hunched over and mumbled like an idiot.

Doom should play like a mixture of Ming the merciless from the Flash Gordon 1980 film and John Sheas Lex Luthor from the Loius and Clark Superman show from the 90s imo supreme arrogance couled with a visible feeling of extreme intelligence.

[Vakanai]

Don't make the movies darker. Make them intelligent. As for casting, keep Chris Evans as the Human Torch. He was perfect. Have the thing be larger with a more rocky appearance dammit! If you have to CG it, CG IT!!

They don't have to CG it. If various monster movies, LXG, and Hellboy have shown us anything, it's that costume effects have upgraded a lot since the old days. If the costume doesn't look right, that's not because of suit limitations that can only be corrected with CG. It's because they did a lame job on the suit.

Which I think they did, personally.

[Vakanai]

For a character like the Thing CGI only seems the most logical way to portray him given his size and texture. I know I've asked this before, but how good would Hulk have look were he merely a guy in a suit? Not very, I imagine.

Actually, I imagine Hulk would have looked a thousand times better in a suit. Use the same kind of tricks and such they did with Hyde from League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (an ordinary movie, but Hyde looked right) only, you know, green.

[Vakanai]

I think we have seen with Dr. Manhatten that a cgi character can express human emotions just as well as a real one.

He was also a glowing blue guy. And I believe his movements were done with a real guy.
Thing isn't a glowing blue guy. Also, he smiles more.
Not saying a CG Thing would be bad, but a suit can work well. Besides, I'm more apt to compare a CG Thing to a CG Hulk rather than a CG Manhattan, and honestly, CG Hulk, not good...

[Vakanai]

Are you kidding? Isn't the pic I posted reason enough? That would look f*cking fantastic on screen!

Some people prefer him shorter. Some taller. Just differences in taste, I don't think it matters much for the character so long as he looks good and he's portrayed right.

Is a cool pic.

[Vakanai]

I really don't know how one can make a suit that looks realistic enough so they should just go for CGI i have seen enough instances where it can look good and realistic.

Hellboy movies show pretty realistic suits. Imagine if Ben was done by that crew.

[Gabe99]

From your friendly neighbourhood Mods:

Put some thought into it. Do not just give a topic and then say "Discuss" or "Why". Also, do not provide only a link to somewhere else or copy/paste an entire article from elsewhere and nothing else as the whole post. If you want to talk about something, talk about it. Put some effort into it and make it a springboard for future conversation.