|
I didn’t see a thread for this, though I could have sworn there was one….
Anyway, here’s the Trailer just released the other day. Reminded me a bit of the 2007 movie, plot-wise. I think the FX on Norinn Radd Silver Surfer looked better back then, though this trailer was limited in the alternate Silver Surfer appearances. I still think it would have been better to have Norrin Radd.
I also still am not keen on Pedro Pascal as Reed. As good an actor as he can be, I just don’t find him believable as the smartest guy in the room. Nor do I see him coming across as a good team leader.
The rest of the cast is pretty spot on, and the FX on the Thing look great. His appearance is also very Kirby-sequel. I’m also digging the whole 60s setting. Still not sure if I want to spend money seeing this in a theater.
This and Superman are probably the first time in ages that I am thinking of actually seeing a film in the theatres instead of waiting for a streaming service to pick them up. Both films just feel really good to me
I just hope Galactus shows off why he's fing Beast, along with being semi-reasonable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Looks cool, but seems like the story has been done already. As a movie, I mean. Seems like they could find something new in all the stacks and stacks of FF books. Hollywood is kind of annoying that way though.
I just hope Galactus shows off why he's fing Beast, along with being semi-reasonable.Sorry … what?!?
I mean sure he eats planets...but that doesn't mean you can't have a conversation with the guy. :p ;)
As for a beast...mostly just him shrugging of nukes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Someone's apparently starting rumors on X (I don't use that thing, so can't verify) that they did a reshoot and rewrite of the entire ending of this movie. I personally take it with many grains of salt, but I don't think it'd surprise me if it were true.
My guess is if there's a grain of truth to the rumors, they had originally had Kang show up at the end and since they're now writing him out of the MCU for the most part, they probably altered it.
(IIRC Kang is a relative of Reed Richards, hence why I think they may have originally planned for him to show up.)
I do wish they had just re-cast Kang rather than pretend like he's not an important antagonist for Marvel's stories. Maybe there's some sort of contract magic Jonathan Majors's agent was able to pull to prevent recasting the character.
|
|
To be honest, I've was always leery of Kang as a major villain. Mostly because Time Travel issues can always be a headache to deal with, even for really good writers. And I think current day Marvel has enough of a lack of those to have made a time travel plot very nonsensical.
However, I also agree they should have just recast the role. I suppose it is possible the refusal to recast was some kind of contract thing. It's just as possible they were stuck in the hole they dug for themselves by idiotically refusing to recast T'Challa. In which case they richly deserve any headaches that have resulted.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, I've was always leery of Kang as a major villain. Mostly because Time Travel issues can always be a headache to deal with, even for really good writers. And I think current day Marvel has enough of a lack of those to have made a time travel plot very nonsensical.
However, I also agree they should have just recast the role. I suppose it is possible the refusal to recast was some kind of contract thing. It's just as possible they were stuck in the hole they dug for themselves by idiotically refusing to recast T'Challa. In which case they richly deserve any headaches that have resulted.
Agreed on both counts. Time travel can lead to such nonsense. Doctor Who used to do it right, where it was just about a way to travel to another place and see other points in history. Once you get into stuff with changing the past all kinds of continuity issues emerge and it becomes a massive headache.
I'd rather cleaner jaunts into just alt universe stuff, which is where they are headed.
At the same time, if they had plans to use him, recasting makes so much sense, but I also agree there was probably an issue with the contract.
This said, I understand why they didn't recast T'Challa. Boseman put such a stamp on the role--he truly *was* Black Panther--and he died. I can understand leaving the role closed out of respect for Boseman. Moreover, the comics already had a precedent for others, including Shuri, taking the mantle (although I think it would have been better to give it to Nakia or the Dora Milaje leader I'm forgetting the name of at the moment). Anyway, them doing what they did with the plot of Black Panther 2 felt fine.
Jonathan Majors didn't die, he just turned out to be a horrible human being. No reason to reserve the role out of respect for him, and Kang canonically is blue and purple, easy enough to make him look different.
Uhm I dunno. I mean we've had multiple Frank Castle and no one has complained that much about the last two.
|
|
I've heard some people saying that Pedro Pascal was actually one of the last people they looked at for Reed Richards. That several other actors passed on the role. Of course, I didn't find any articles about other actors (except Davide Tennant), so take that with a grain of salt.
Still, if true, I'd be curious to see who else they might have been looking at, and why those actors might have turned the role down.
|
|
I saw a quote from one of the producers that Sue Storm is the defacto leader of the team. The exact quote was...
“If you do go back through the comics, you realize that Sue Storm is arguably the leader of the Fantastic Four, because without Sue Storm, everything falls apart,” Curtis said.
As someone who's actually read plenty of FF comics, I disagree with him. Sue is more like the heart of the team. Reed is, and should be, the leader. However, I am not surprised they couldn't get even that correct.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I saw a quote from one of the producers that Sue Storm is the defacto leader of the team. The exact quote was...
“If you do go back through the comics, you realize that Sue Storm is arguably the leader of the Fantastic Four, because without Sue Storm, everything falls apart,” Curtis said.
As someone who's actually read plenty of FF comics, I disagree with him. Sue is more like the heart of the team. Reed is, and should be, the leader. However, I am not surprised they couldn't get even that correct.
I think it depends on how you define "leader." If it's person who makes the final decisions or who is spokesperson, it's Reed. If the "leader" is the one that without whom they fall apart, I agree with their take that it's Sue. I may not have read as many FF comics as you, but I've read a fair few and I agree with their take. I might not have worded it exactly like that, and I suspect they're trying to generate a bit of buzz to get people talking about it. No publicity like controversy.
As to what a leader is, I come from a subcultural background where servant leadership is our expected leadership model, and some of my communities don't even name a "leader" and we engage in group decision making. Even where I have worked, where people have leader-like titles and have to make some hard calls still see themselves as not the authority per se but only a final word after considerable consultation with others. Folks will hardcore rebel against someone who gives orders. Meanwhile, someone who comes from a more corporate or military culture would define leadership very differently (not that I am suggesting those are your background, per se, but I would not be shocked if you did not come from the same world of bleeding heart religious communities and nonprofits that I do :) ).
Moreover, I can tell you that where I come from, I'd much rather be working for Sue than Reed, personally.
All this is to say, I don't think the creators are being unfaithful to the comics more than they interpret things very differently from you and others. And at the same time, I think they're engaging in a bit of s!@& stirring (which they probably shouldn't do).
|
|
All this is to say, I don't think the creators are being unfaithful to the comics more than they interpret things very differently from you and others. And at the same time, I think they're engaging in a bit of s&~& stirring (which they probably shouldn't do).
I agree. They are interpreting things differently. And incorrectly :)
And, yes, it’s definitely stirring some excrement. Which seems to be 98% of what passes for advertising in the entertainment industry these days. My own feeling is they do it in part hoping to stir up hostile commentary, so they then have the ready excuse of “toxic fans” to blame any failures on.
*de rigueur
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I always felt like Sue was the practical and kind of *useful* one around the business end of things, while Reed could spend three days in the lab and totally not pay the bills, or feed the kids, or bother to file a patent on something, and then end up like Tesla, wondering why his life has fallen apart if he's so darn smart...
So her being his (and the teams) 'manager' who kind of keeps everything on track and running smoothly fits my view of how their dynamic always seemed, since Reed was (inconsistently, I'll admit**) often shown as a bit of an 'absent-minded professor' stereotype.
**Given the long publishing history, there have been like *forty* characterizations for Reed and Sue over the years, and some have him totally the absent minded professor, and Sue the hypercompetent 'team Mom' who keeps it all together, and others have Reed being just amazing at *everything* (he's a scientist, he's Mr. Action, he's a celebrity, he was a soldier in WW2 and yet mysteriously not eighty years old, he's got a Nobel Peace Prize, he's not afraid to slap his wife when she's speaking out of turn!) and Sue a silly flighty girl who likes clothes and gets captured because the bad-guy owns a dog that sniffed her out while she was invisible. :/ Obviously, I'm leaning towards the first version of Sue (and there's even a recent-isg development in the comics of her having been an agent of SHIELD for years, behind the scenes, which, I'm not sure I'm completely adjusted to, quite yet...).
With all the characterizations, it's almost impossible to tag them for 'not getting canon right' since canon is all over the friggin' place. :)
Heck, there were *three* different retcons of why Reed supported the Registration Act! (It was the Brute, pretending to be Reed, Dr. Doom even kidnapped Sue *to protect her from the villain pretending to be her husband!* He was a Skrull imposter! (The famous Bendis retcon for every sketchy thing heroes had done for the last decade or so, except Hank Pym, because screw that guy in particular!) He was mindjobbed by the Mad Thinker who convinced him of some BS psychohistory thing using his superhuman intelligence! There, three different reasons why fans are not supposed to blame Reed for sending supervillain 'capekillers' to 'arrest' his wife and best friend and brother in law over a law *that hadn't actually passed yet!*)
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not really concerned with what someone said in an interview out of context. When the movie is out, watch it, and then decide if they did a good job or not. Could have nailed the movie and fumbled the interview question, or there's simply misinterpretation of what was said.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I have always wanted most in a FF project was a Modern Family style sitcom where all of their big action pieces happen at the end or beginning of each episode. What makes them special isn't their powers, it is the fact that they are a family in a way that no other super team is.
What I have always wanted most in a FF project was a Modern Family style sitcom where all of their big action pieces happen at the end or beginning of each episode. What makes them special isn't their powers, it is the fact that they are a family in a way that no other super team is.
That is an awesome concept for a series and I'm sorry we'll probably not see it.
I do like that they are definitely digging into the F4's family life, and we're seeing stuff like dinner at home. I like slice of life with my superheroes when it's appropriate.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I have always wanted most in a FF project was a Modern Family style sitcom where all of their big action pieces happen at the end or beginning of each episode. What makes them special isn't their powers, it is the fact that they are a family in a way that no other super team is.
One thing I liked about the first FF movie (with Jessica Alba, Chris Evans, Chikilis, etc.) was how all four of them worked together for that combat stunt that defeated Doom at the end. After years of reading comics in which the Fantastic Four are described as functioning like a well-oiled machine, as a team, as a family, it was nice to see on screen.
And then the sequel had everyone's powers loaded up on Johnny so he could solo the Surfer with all their powers combined? Le sigh. Missed the point, completely, for me.
|
|
One thing I liked about the first FF movie (with Jessica Alba, Chris Evans, Chikilis, etc.) was how all four of them worked together for that combat stunt that defeated Doom at the end. After years of reading comics in which the Fantastic Four are described as functioning like a well-oiled machine, as a team, as a family, it was nice to see on screen.
And then the sequel had everyone's powers loaded up on Johnny so he could solo the Surfer with all their powers combined? Le sigh. Missed the point, completely, for me.
That was an awesome bit of team work. I recall Reed coming up with a great plan. I liked that strategic thinking he showed.
At least the sequel gave us actual Norrin Radd Silver Surfer. And I'd argue the best interpretation of Doctor Doom* in live action.
*having never seen the old Roger Corman FF
|
|
I saw that Julia Garner gave a few comments and/or interviews about her being cast as a variation on the Silver Surfer. And her attitude seems to basically be "Hey! I just took a job".
I still disagree with this variation on the Surfer, but I applaud her attitude. Not attacking fans! What a novel concept.
Oh I thought it was commentary on the way "best since Endgame" has been a talking point centered around every MCU movie that has been released since Endgame.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When I was a kid, we used to visit friends of the family another state away periodically. My parents' friends had a son about 10 years older than me who was very into geeky stuff and is basically the brother I never had. I'd think most teenage boys would be extremely protective of their nerdy collections, but when we went to visit he was happy to let me sit in his room and read from his giant pile of comics, which I gleefully did.
There I read, in particular, book after book of the Fantastic Four. It's weird because I never collected the book on my own (I did get Fraction's Future Foundation for awhile many years ago), because I loved it. Particularly the family dynamics and the distinctive personalities each character had, as well as just the sort of retrofuture feel. I lost hours in this world of the Fantastic Four.
Seeing the movie today brought me back to being a little kid, reading those comics all over again. Something in the casting, the worldbuild, the performances... in a way that I never felt with the other F4 movies (which were fine). These folks felt to me like Reed, Sue, Jonny, and Ben lifted straight from the page.
Obviously because these comics have been around a really long time, and we all have different takes on the comics, and my memory of what I read as a six/seven year old probably does not reflect some of y'all's memories, YMMV.
But to me the key strength of the film was just creating this particular world and the family dynamic super well. Special points for how they did Reed, who sometimes is fine but sometimes I can't stand. I liked this version of Reed but he still felt true to the character and he definitely played a "genius leader and strategist" role despite earlier general fandom pearl clutching.
I do think the pacing was off and at one point--NOT the fault of the film but because of some furniture moving/taking apart/rebuilding I was doing earlier in the day--I fell asleep so there was a part I missed. So I can't nitpick the plot too much because I probably missed certain details. But the second half is especially good and the characterization is good throughout.
Galactus was realized really well and the Silver Surfer was really cool. I don't know why but I was especially fascinated by her silver plated hair. Not that that has anything to do with the plot (I liked the character as well), just stuck in my head.
ETA: The powers are also visualized and used really well.
I thought there'd be more buildup for the next films, and there wasn't that much, and that's a good thing. The story just really focused on the family dealing with Galactus. There's just enough to see where things might go, with requisite shiny cameo.
Fun after credits thing that is non-plot relevant.
|
|
Seeing a lot of rumors about the next "Avengers" movie. I also see some people speculating the reason for some of the sudden casting leaks is to distract from FF's performance. That wouldn't surprise me in the least.
At this point, does anyone see it even breaking $500 million? It really seems to be fizzling at the box office. Maybe if they pull a Superman? Leave it in theaters for just over a month, then make it available for VoD to bump up the money earned.
It's a shame, since I keep hearing the movie is pretty decent.