PDA

View Full Version : Fantastic Four - more news


Bullseye
01-21-2007, 03:24 PM
Just read in this months Total Film that Doom will also make an appearance in the sequel. Nothing yet about Galactus.

Alex655321
01-21-2007, 03:27 PM
Couln't stand how they used Doom in the original:mad:

Endless Wake
01-21-2007, 03:31 PM
I had heard before that he would be in the sequel but this time the director promised he'll be much more like he is in the comics.

Alex655321
01-21-2007, 03:37 PM
I had heard before that he would be in the sequel but this time the director promised he'll be much more like he is in the comics.

Thankfully!
Although it wasn't as bad as what they did to Cap
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l52/alex655321_2006/Joke%20Pictures/Captainamerica1.gif

CessnaDriver
01-21-2007, 03:37 PM
I do not trust the director. He screwed up the first one badly. Why does anyone think he suddenly can handle a character with the gravity of Surfer?

Answer. Likely not.

I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Ish
01-21-2007, 03:42 PM
Couln't stand how they used Doom in the original:mad:

that was the major point of me hating that movie. :banghead: let hope they don't link surfer with doom since doom had nothing to do with the surfers first appearance.

Ghost
01-21-2007, 04:12 PM
I would think he ends up coming up in the end to tie in a trilogy.

Alex655321
01-21-2007, 04:18 PM
that was the major point of me hating that movie. :banghead: let hope they don't link surfer with doom since doom had nothing to do with the surfers first appearance.

That would be terrible if they did that!!!
But I am sure that if Doom and the Surfer are in it, they will be connected somehow.

rychehitman
01-21-2007, 04:28 PM
Maybe Doom gets a new look while in Latveria?

CessnaDriver
01-21-2007, 04:47 PM
They will keep effing with the characters like in the first movie.
Surfer was already doing crap he doesn't do in the comics and his appearance was changed too in that 90 second trailer they released.

Ghost
01-21-2007, 05:05 PM
Oh he has pupils now, big change.:tounge:

Tattoo-X
01-21-2007, 05:12 PM
Just read in this months Total Film that Doom will also make an appearance in the sequel. Nothing yet about Galactus.

I read this in Wizard a couple of weeks ago.
Didn't think it was big news.

Don't know why so many people on the Forum go to comic related movies, they're never happy with them.:confused:

Alex655321
01-21-2007, 05:18 PM
I read this in Wizard a couple of weeks ago.
Didn't think it was big news.

Don't know why so many people on the Forum go to comic related movies, they're never happy with them.:confused:

critique statues, critique movies. Its in the blood.

CessnaDriver
01-21-2007, 05:27 PM
Oh he has pupils now, big change.:tounge:

How much can you change of a character before it is no longer true to the people who know the character?

And if they get him right. He is still going to be interacting with the Fantastic Faux of the first film. They need to recast Reed and Susan if you ask me. But too late for that.

CessnaDriver
01-21-2007, 05:47 PM
I read this in Wizard a couple of weeks ago.
Didn't think it was big news.

Don't know why so many people on the Forum go to comic related movies, they're never happy with them.:confused:

It is hit or miss with comic films.

When they get them right, they are amazing.

When they get them wrong (and I dont care if it was a hit either) they can really P.O. readers of the comics by inventing crap that was never there as if they didnt even care to read the comics at all. All films are compromise of course. I was not one to get pissed at Spiderman not making his own web shooters. I just want to see *respect* for the characters. For who they are.
And making them look and act right is part of that respect.

Raping characters for a mass appeal movie to make millions in the first weekend release is not respect for them. Sure I understand capitalism. But it can serve respecting the characters too.

VaultMan
01-21-2007, 05:50 PM
There was very little to like about the first one (some of the effects, and the Thing were ok). But they completely SCREWED up Dr. Doom. Even if they had nailed Doom, and still screwed up Sue and Reed maybe I couldve enjoyed it a little...

This thing with the Surfer does not boad well (intangibility and what not). You just have screenwriters associated with this film and the last that feel no sense of loyalty to the original material.

Where the hell is Avi Arad? He seemed to be a good influence on these Marvel films. IS he retired or something from his former position with Marvel?

VaultMan
01-21-2007, 05:53 PM
All films are compromise of course. I was not one to get pissed at Spiderman not making his own web shooters. I just want to see *respect* for the characters.

Well said.

Though I was slightly aggravated at the "organic web shooters" it was easy overlook because both Spidey films were between very good and rock solid.

Tony Coca
01-21-2007, 06:04 PM
How much can you change of a character before it is no longer true to the people who know the character?

And if they get him right. He is still going to be interacting with the Fantastic Faux of the first film. They need to recast Reed and Susan if you ask me. But too late for that.

yeah but that could be said for all the marvel movies that have been done.The casting for FF suxed except for thing.His look sucked but the choice for the charcter was done well.Spiderman and his webs coming from his wrist pissed me off as well.

CompEng1
01-21-2007, 06:07 PM
People are quick to blame the director but in the end the blame must be placed on the screen writers. Brian Singer did a great job with Xmen because the script was good. But in Superman Returns the Lex Luthor plot was ridiculous and rehashed. No matter how good a director is, he can't rewrite a poor script. If the script is bad the movie will be bad. The director can only be held accountable for what he does with the script. The first FF movie was so poorly written that the guy helming the filming never had a chance. Cmon, Sue Storm was taller than the Thing!

lord odin
01-21-2007, 06:23 PM
I read this in Wizard a couple of weeks ago.
Didn't think it was big news.

Don't know why so many people on the Forum go to comic related movies, they're never happy with them.:confused:
I loved Batman Begins and the 2 spidey films superman sucked.

Krypton Knight
01-21-2007, 06:31 PM
I wish I could remember what site I read this on, but Tim Story (the director) talked about Galactus and was talking about the possibilty of Big G being somewhat based on the Ultimate Extinction version of Galactus.

And it also seem that the Silver Surfer prefers to go commando as he cruises the spaceways. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31303

Tattoo-X
01-21-2007, 08:11 PM
I go to enjoy a movie.
I'm not going to nit pick it to death.
You know, Rogue not flying, Wolverine being tall, no mechanical webshooters, etc.
I can even look pass the Hulk dogs, if the movie wasn't so damn slow.
Batman was great. Wasn't going to see it at the theater, but glad I did. I'm sure there's a few out there that would complain about some part of it.

CessnaDriver
01-21-2007, 09:02 PM
I go to enjoy a movie too, I gave it a chance.
And the first FF movie should have been great because the characters are great. What is wrong with expecting more?
I enjoyed X-Men films, Spiderman films, Superman Returns, especially enjoyed Batman Begins (thought it made up for the horrible Burton films).

The Impossibles was a far better FF movie then the FF movie.

I wish someone like Raimi, Nolen, or Singer would have done it.

Dont tell me nobody here has not been greatly dissappointed at how a comic adaption was handled?

Honestly, they could keep making crap FF movies until doomsday for all I care now. It has already been set in motion now and it is what it is.

But my dismay is that these clowns are now going to present to the world their "vision" of one of my favorite characters of all time.

I really wish they would have looked at a different page of the comic books when they were looking for cool pictures to copy to make their film.

God knows they were not reading any of them.

Endless Wake
01-21-2007, 09:51 PM
Though I was slightly aggravated at the "organic web shooters" it was easy overlook because both Spidey films were between very good and rock solid.
That one bothered me as well, I always thought of the web shooters as a big part of Spider-Man, plus it was proof of his intelligence. Getting rid of them kind of dumb down the character.

Endless Wake
01-21-2007, 09:56 PM
FF 1 has major problems. The script, cast and directing were all way off the mark. It could have been done right so easily. Let's see if they can redeem themselves.

rilynil
01-22-2007, 03:53 AM
That one bothered me as well, I always thought of the web shooters as a big part of Spider-Man, plus it was proof of his intelligence. Getting rid of them kind of dumb down the character.
I hear ya, EW. But this may sound like blasphemy, but to me, Stan Lee should have had Peter shooting organic webs in the first place. Why would someone inherit all the powers of a spider EXCEPT being able to shoot a web? To me, the movie's solution made more sense than the original origin. (you know, I don't believe I've ever typed those last two words back-to-back. "original origin" hmmm. Weird.)

CessnaDriver
01-22-2007, 10:54 AM
The important thing was is that Raimi DID show that Peter was very intelligent in other ways. Something I think they did not convincingly show at all of Reed in the FF movie, afterall he is supposed to be the "world's smartest man", instead they chose to show us how he wipes his butt. See what I am getting at? Respect for the character.

Raven1014
01-25-2007, 01:54 AM
I read this in Wizard a couple of weeks ago.
Didn't think it was big news.

Don't know why so many people on the Forum go to comic related movies, they're never happy with them.:confused:

The last issue of Wizard, #183, has an interview about the new movie. The very first line says that Galactus will appear in the movie. Nothing about when he'll show up, how much screen time he'll have or what he'll look like. just a confirmation that he'll be in it.

Jesse321
01-25-2007, 10:32 AM
The last issue of Wizard, #183, has an interview about the new movie. The very first line says that Galactus will appear in the movie. Nothing about when he'll show up, how much screen time he'll have or what he'll look like. just a confirmation that he'll be in it.I hope that they will at least let him look like the original comicbook image, I just got to the Galactus stage of Marvel Ultimate Alliance and Galactus looked SO COOL!

Meteor Man
01-25-2007, 10:54 PM
I hear ya, EW. But this may sound like blasphemy, but to me, Stan Lee should have had Peter shooting organic webs in the first place. Why would someone inherit all the powers of a spider EXCEPT being able to shoot a web? To me, the movie's solution made more sense than the original origin. (you know, I don't believe I've ever typed those last two words back-to-back. "original origin" hmmm. Weird.)


Well, if you're going to be a stickler about it, if he was REALLY going to get the web powers from the spider, he'd be shooting them out of his...well...you get the picture, right?:)

Makkari1
01-26-2007, 04:52 PM
I pray that the producers of this movie don't take liberties with Galactus and try and make him into something that no one would recognize. I absolutely hated the Ultimate Universe version of the Big "G" and wished that book was re-written so we could appreciate who/what Galactus is. I hate movies that deviate so far from the original even fans can't make out what's going on.

IMO they screwed up the 1st FF movie by not making Ben a little bigger than what he is. He should have been a not as big as the Hulk but bigger than a guy in rubber suit.:peoples: And Doom should have been a guy in a armor suit, not a guy that is a suit.:peoples: The Surfer is OK for now and I hold Judgment until the movie comes out, but Galactus had better be one big Gigantic guy who consumes planets for energy not a bunch of bug things that act like infesting roaches (stupid) with a single mind.

In general the Marvel adaptation of the comics heroes have been OK not great but tolerable. They still deviated from the true comic character making them seem less powerful (i.e.: Colossus & Juggernaut were too small, these men are freakishly big and should have been CGI, come on people you got the technology use it for Pete's sake). I feel that if they stick to the true character the movie would be off the chain, IMO.

Meteor Man
01-26-2007, 10:36 PM
I pray that the producers of this movie don't take liberties with Galactus and try and make him into something that no one would recognize. I absolutely hated the Ultimate Universe version of the Big "G" and wished that book was re-written so we could appreciate who/what Galactus is. I hate movies that deviate so far from the original even fans can't make out what's going on.

IMO they screwed up the 1st FF movie by not making Ben a little bigger than what he is. He should have been a not as big as the Hulk but bigger than a guy in rubber suit.:peoples: And Doom should have been a guy in a armor suit, not a guy that is a suit.:peoples: The Surfer is OK for now and I hold Judgment until the movie comes out, but Galactus had better be one big Gigantic guy who consumes planets for energy not a bunch of bug things that act like infesting roaches (stupid) with a single mind.

In general the Marvel adaptation of the comics heroes have been OK not great but tolerable. They still deviated from the true comic character making them seem less powerful (i.e.: Colossus & Juggernaut were too small, these men are freakishly big and should have been CGI, come on people you got the technology use it for Pete's sake). I feel that if they stick to the true character the movie would be off the chain, IMO.


That's what I'm talkin' about!!!:buttrock: And, they shouldn't only use it for Pete's sake, but for Cain's sake too!:D