Fantastic Four Movie

[uclapeterg]

which goes to show you that critics don't know [embarrasing lack of self control].

[goldust40]

It's true I've slated the movie, although my attitude is far from pessimistic. My only concern is that we've yet to see a challenging super-hero based film that transcends the comics medium,

 

GD - how can you say you're not pessismistic when you say in your next sentence that you haven't seen a film that transcends the medium?

 

BTW, What do you mean by this?

 

I meant a film that breaks free of any comic genre boundaries or constraints and could be appreciated as a separate artistic entity in cinema. Please note that I'm referring to super-hero movies. Certain films have reached such heights which owe a little to the four color medium, but not super-hero flicks.

 

I'm not pessimistic because I don't expect much - super-hero films have largely been reasonably entertaining if mostly workmanlike and uninspired, but predictably that's to do with those aforementioned constraints.

 

Spidey 2 and the first Batman film were very good, but for the most part there hasn't been a super-hero film that's done justice to the source material, and dared to go radically beyond it.

 

Alan Moore needs to oversee the Watchmen, if that project ever gets the green light......

[goldust40]

which goes to show you that critics don't know [embarrasing lack of self control].

 

Ah, they know [embarrasing lack of self control]. People just ignore 'em, though.

[uclapeterg]

I think they know [embarrasing lack of self control], but who cares? A critic cannot represent the typical person who sees 8-10 movies a year (if that). We all bring our own experience into a film.

 

BTW, GD, I'm surprised you're so down on comic book movies. I'm surprised it took this long to get any Marvel film made (esp with the initial success of Superman and Batman). I think that well written comics are about 90% better than most of the stories out there.

[goldust40]

I think they know [embarrasing lack of self control], but who cares? A critic cannot represent the typical person who sees 8-10 movies a year (if that). We all bring our own experience into a film.

 

No argument there, that's one of the great things about cinema, and to a more moderate extent, comics too.

 

BTW, GD, I'm surprised you're so down on comic book movies.

 

I'm not down on them. Some of them have been very good, even if very few bear repeated viewings. The problem as I see it is that no comic book movie (including Sin City) has dared to go beyond its' genre trappings. One of the basic difficulties with transferring a comic to film is that the comic is technically the storyboard and -script draft. I think this deters even auteur type directors such as Bryan Singer from giving the project their own tilt on the subject matter.

 

Essentially such directors are work for hire on an "event" movie, which also has its' constraints. Plus it's purely a commercial venture.

 

 

 

I think that well written comics are about 90% better than most of the stories out there.

 

Damn right, and savvy directors and producers haven't been afraid to steal elements from particular titles for films that aren't constrained by source material - the Matrix and Unbreakable spring to mind.

 

Try telling people what you said in your last quote and they won't believe you, though.

[uclapeterg]

I know, I'm just a comic geek.

 

You present some interesting ideas. I'll have to think on them and maybe ask some more questions.

[tth2]

The Island's production budget is $122 million and the movie made $12 million opening weekend.

Good, maybe the studios will finally wake up and realize that Michael Bay is a worthless, talentless director and stop wasting big budgets on him when better directors might be able to take big-time casts and big-time resources and actually produce something worthwhile.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

The Island's production budget is $122 million and the movie made $12 million opening weekend.

Good, maybe the studios will finally wake up and realize that Michael Bay is a worthless, talentless director and stop wasting big budgets on him when better directors might be able to take big-time casts and big-time resources and actually produce something worthwhile.

 

In all fairness, I can't remember the last time a $100+ million dollar movie got so little marketing and exposure. While I was aware the movie was coming out sometime soon, I didn't know it opened last Friday until I checked Moviefone. Everyone knew six months prior when movies like Star Wars Episode III, War of the Worlds, and Fantastic Four were debuting. Shame on the studio for not doing more. Of course, they might have known they had a turkey on their hands and decided to cut their losses early.

[tth2]

Of course, they might have known they had a turkey on their hands and decided to cut their losses early.

You answered your own question.

[FlamingCarrot]

If the sequel to FF consisted of the Thing squatting over and toilet and letting loose for two hours, we'd still have the same fanboys shouting "OMG THE MOVIE HAS MADE A LOT OF MONEY SO ITS GOOD OK?! AND THE KIDS LIKED THE MOVEE SO THATS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY!!!

 

[uclapeterg]

If the sequel to FF consisted of the Thing squatting over and toilet and letting loose for two hours, we'd still have the same fanboys shouting "OMG THE MOVIE HAS MADE A LOT OF MONEY SO ITS GOOD OK?! AND THE KIDS LIKED THE MOVEE SO THATS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY!!!

 

 

OMG, when were you possessed by JC?

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

If the sequel to FF consisted of the Thing squatting over and toilet and letting loose for two hours, we'd still have the same fanboys shouting "OMG THE MOVIE HAS MADE A LOT OF MONEY SO ITS GOOD OK?! AND THE KIDS LIKED THE MOVEE SO THATS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY!!!

 

 

You know, I really don't get all this animosity toward the movie and the people who have come out and said they liked it. Its a fluffy, summer popcorn movie that doesn't take itself too seriously and manages to entertain most people. It'll do well enough at the box office and DVD to justify a sequel or two, and hopefully appeal to a new generation.

 

Does every comic book movie have to break new ground, have a deep involved plot and cater to a sophisticated audience in order for it to be respected?

[FlyingDonut]

If the sequel to FF consisted of the Thing squatting over and toilet and letting loose for two hours, we'd still have the same fanboys shouting "OMG THE MOVIE HAS MADE A LOT OF MONEY SO ITS GOOD OK?! AND THE KIDS LIKED THE MOVEE SO THATS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY!!!

 

 

You know, I really don't get all this animosity toward the movie and the people who have come out and said they liked it. Its a fluffy, summer popcorn movie that doesn't take itself too seriously and manages to entertain most people. It'll do well enough at the box office and DVD to justify a sequel or two, and hopefully appeal to a new generation.

 

Does every comic book movie have to break new ground, have a deep involved plot and cater to a sophisticated audience in order for it to be respected?

 

Very well said!

[burntboy]

If the sequel to FF consisted of the Thing squatting over and toilet and letting loose for two hours, we'd still have the same fanboys shouting "OMG THE MOVIE HAS MADE A LOT OF MONEY SO ITS GOOD OK?! AND THE KIDS LIKED THE MOVEE SO THATS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY!!!

 

 

You know, I really don't get all this animosity toward the movie and the people who have come out and said they liked it. Its a fluffy, summer popcorn movie that doesn't take itself too seriously and manages to entertain most people. It'll do well enough at the box office and DVD to justify a sequel or two, and hopefully appeal to a new generation.

 

Does every comic book movie have to break new ground, have a deep involved plot and cater to a sophisticated audience in order for it to be respected?

 

Very well said!

 

Here, Here..................

 

god, i shouldn't add this but i watched Elektra last night for the first time. my expectations were so low (based on critical reviews, board members considerable disdain, poor monetary success, etc) that i was quite surprised that it was OK........

[flink]

 

You know, I really don't get all this animosity toward the movie and the people who have come out and said they liked it. Its a fluffy, summer popcorn movie that doesn't take itself too seriously and manages to entertain most people. It'll do well enough at the box office and DVD to justify a sequel or two, and hopefully appeal to a new generation.

 

Does every comic book movie have to break new ground, have a deep involved plot and cater to a sophisticated audience in order for it to be respected?

 

 

I knew if I waited long enough someone would come along and perfectly put into words how I felt after seeing FF.

 

My 23 year old daughter and I went and she is by no means a fangirl yet she thoroughly enjoyed the film.

 

It is what it is, a good summer movie and I look forward to the sequel.

[FlamingCarrot]

You know, I really don't get all this animosity toward the movie and the people who have come out and said they liked it. Its a fluffy, summer popcorn movie that doesn't take itself too seriously and manages to entertain most people. It'll do well enough at the box office and DVD to justify a sequel or two, and hopefully appeal to a new generation.

 

Does every comic book movie have to break new ground, have a deep involved plot and cater to a sophisticated audience in order for it to be respected?

 

I harbor as much animosity towards the FF movie as I do for a crappy movie like "Battlefield Earth," which is none. I never said a comic book movie had to "break new ground, have a deep involved plot and cater to a sophisticated audience," but at the same time, if I think the movie stunk, I'm going to voice my opinion.

 

What cracks me up is the apologists for this movie who keep trying to argue the movie didn't stink by saying "look! the movie generated over $100 million, therefore you're wrong! it was good!" or "oh the critics don't know jack! This movie has made over $100 million!"

 

The Matrix Reloaded grossed almost $300 million domestically. Is anyone going to argue that movie was any good?

 

I'm suppose to take into account whether a movie is good or not by how many possible new FF/comic book fans may enter the hobby because of this movie? I don't think so.

 

If someone wants to argue the movie was actually good because of the plot, story or the acting, feel free to debate those points, but I've heard too many times that this movie must be good because it hasn't lost money.

[uclapeterg]

I am not arguing that the movie is good BECAUSE it's took in a lot of money. To each his own. I have hated a lot of movies that made tons of money.

 

What I was disagreeing with is the fact that a lot of people (including me) thought that the movie was going to not make a lot of money. In no way am I suggesting that a movie is good because it makes $xxx dollars.

 

People's opinions are neither right or wrong. It's an opinion. I really want to get away from one person being right and one person being wrong. We can't all be right because we each have an opinion?

[joe_collector]

If someone wants to argue the movie was actually good because of the plot, story or the acting, feel free to debate those points

 

Don't hold your breath waiting. The movie stunk.

[BradleyX2]

What cracks me up is the apologists for this movie who keep trying to argue the movie didn't stink by saying "look! the movie generated over $100 million, therefore you're wrong! it was good!" or "oh the critics don't know jack! This movie has made over $100 million!"

 

 

People in this thread aren't bringing up how much money FF has made to argue that it's a *good* movie. They're bringing it up to counter arguments that FF has lost money.

[joe_collector]

They're bringing it up to counter arguments that FF has lost money.

 

Come on, you really can't believe the movie has made money at this point, can you? It obviously has not (but easily will on DVD), so what's the reason you're posting BO numbers again...?