Fantastic Four from Fox Studios (8/7/15) 1 1

[ChrisInBaltimore]

Doesn't bother me in the least bit. YOU are the one who's gone over the top to deny it.

 

Just own it dude. You were a big cheerleader for this movie.

 

Everyone sees it. You were a cheerleader for this movie.

 

Nothing to be ashamed of. You wanted it to succeed despite all the signs that pointed to it being a dud.

 

Just own. You were a cheerleader for this movie.

 

 

I already said I liked the first couple of trailers. And if you go back through this thread, I have even said it could potential fail. But I felt the earlier trailers gave a good sign.

 

Please get that on a t-shirt so I can wear it. I'll put it on, with pride.

 

No. No it's not.

 

It is.

 

 

Why can't the two of you post in the thread while ignoring each other? The two of you are making me

[jsilverjanet]

I kinda like their discussion :shrug:

[Bosco685]

Why can't the two of you post in the thread while ignoring each other? The two of you are making me

 

 

Now I'm not going to get my t-shirt. Thanks Hydra!

 

 

Okay.

[Gatsby77]

 

Tom Cruise's domestic vs budget, last 4 movies...

 

Edge of Tomorrow - $100MIL BUDGET: $178MIL (-$ 78MIL)

Oblivion - $ 89MIL BUDGET: $120MIL (-$ 31MIL)

Jack Reacher - $ 80MIL BUDGET: $ 60MIL +$ 20MIL

Rock of Ages - $ 38MIL BUDGET: $ 75MIL (-$ 44MIL)

That's a Domestic loss total of $133 MILLION over his last 4 movies....

 

Surprising.......especially because I saw 3 of those movies at the theater!

 

Tom Cruise is still box office gold. Check out this analysis from Forbes' Scott Mendelson: http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2015/07/30/box-office-tom-cruise-is-still-a-man-of-few-flops/

 

He points out that Cruise hasn't really had a real flop since Legend, but excuses Rock of Ages for being an ensemble piece rather than a primarily Cruise vehicle.

 

Edge of Tomorrow - $178 mil. budget: $369 million worldwide (2.0x)

Oblivion - $120 mil. budget: $286 million worldwide (2.3x)

Jack Reacher - $60 mil. budget: $218 million worldwide (3.5x)

 

Also, Jack Reacher has a sequel scheduled for 2017. So, clearly considered a success.

[fantastic_four]

This third effort, based on the 8 or so reviews that I have read on RT, point to two problems: a bland -script and a director who was in over his head. (Fox thought Trank was the next Steven Spielberg, gambled and lost.)

 

I'm not sure a young Steven Spielberg would have done much better. Spielberg rose to fame on original works that don't carry the type of existing expectational baggage we're so vividly outlining in this thread that Trank skipped over to his own detriment in favor of modernizing the story.

[Bosco685]

This third effort, based on the 8 or so reviews that I have read on RT, point to two problems: a bland -script and a director who was in over his head. (Fox thought Trank was the next Steven Spielberg, gambled and lost.)

 

I'm not sure a young Steven Spielberg would have done much better. Spielberg rose to fame on original works that don't carry the type of existing expectational baggage we're so vividly outlining in this thread that Trank skipped over to his own detriment in favor of modernizing the story.

 

I think you hit it right on the head after reading so many reviews now.

 

Why would Fox jeopardize a production like this when they are trying to build out a much larger superhero franchise? You would assume there would be folks there directly representing the studio watching this all come together. All that money being thrown into a production, you would want some studio comic book geek squad coming back with an update if this even looks like it is going to be interesting.

 

 

I'll still watch it to judge for myself. It will probably not be in a theater.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

I kinda like their discussion :shrug:

 

Go sleep with a DVD under your pillow

 

PS: Why isn't it a bluray? Still living in the past?

Edited August 5, 2015 by ChrisInBaltimore

[VintageComics]

no offense but I think anything with Tom Cruise is likely to be a home run. The guy is box office gold

 

Sure but the supporting cast was good, as was the story, as were the twists and turns, as were the stunts. It was a good movie.

 

Yes they made a very good movie with GOTG but IM2, IM3 and both Thors weren't exactly great.

 

I liked all those stinkers.

[Buzzetta]

I'm not trying to compare them to this FF. That was not my point. My point was against the sweeping statement that Marvel makes very good movies.

 

Yes the make very good movies, they also make okay movies too. They aren't perfect and should be held to the same critical standard that every movie in these threads seems to be.

 

Yesterday I was watching Rocky IV a movie that I think most people really like. But there are so many over the top moments, scenes that have no business being there, horrible acting yet people love that movie and rarely do i hear criticism of it.

 

Some people even say it's their favorite (not me, #1 is the by far and away the best of them).

 

I can only imagine how a movie like that would get torn apart in todays age.

 

 

Rocky defeats communism. End of story.

[jsilverjanet]

I kinda like their discussion :shrug:

 

Go sleep with a DVD under your pillow

 

PS: Why isn't it a bluray? Still living in the past?

 

I wanted to be cool, but the sad truth it's a VHS tape

[jsilverjanet]

I'm not trying to compare them to this FF. That was not my point. My point was against the sweeping statement that Marvel makes very good movies.

 

Yes the make very good movies, they also make okay movies too. They aren't perfect and should be held to the same critical standard that every movie in these threads seems to be.

 

Yesterday I was watching Rocky IV a movie that I think most people really like. But there are so many over the top moments, scenes that have no business being there, horrible acting yet people love that movie and rarely do i hear criticism of it.

 

Some people even say it's their favorite (not me, #1 is the by far and away the best of them).

 

I can only imagine how a movie like that would get torn apart in todays age.

 

 

Rocky defeats communism. End of story.

 

there are so many scenes, that i was like :doh: what the hell was going on?

 

People need to watch it cause it's so odd that in the end none of those mistakes matter, people are chanting "Rocky, Rocky" and when

WINS - yes he WINS against the great and powerful Drago

and the theme song comes on (great song by the way) you are just happy

 

That movie Creed does look solid

[jsilverjanet]

 

Yes they made a very good movie with GOTG but IM2, IM3 and both Thors weren't exactly great.

 

I liked all those stinkers.

 

could be worse, you could like the band Creed and then you'd really have problems

[comix4fun]

 

Tom Cruise's domestic vs budget, last 4 movies...

 

Edge of Tomorrow - $100MIL BUDGET: $178MIL (-$ 78MIL)

Oblivion - $ 89MIL BUDGET: $120MIL (-$ 31MIL)

Jack Reacher - $ 80MIL BUDGET: $ 60MIL +$ 20MIL

Rock of Ages - $ 38MIL BUDGET: $ 75MIL (-$ 44MIL)

That's a Domestic loss total of $133 MILLION over his last 4 movies....

 

Surprising.......especially because I saw 3 of those movies at the theater!

 

Tom Cruise is still box office gold. Check out this analysis from Forbes' Scott Mendelson: http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2015/07/30/box-office-tom-cruise-is-still-a-man-of-few-flops/

 

He points out that Cruise hasn't really had a real flop since Legend, but excuses Rock of Ages for being an ensemble piece rather than a primarily Cruise vehicle.

 

Edge of Tomorrow - $178 mil. budget: $369 million worldwide (2.0x)

Oblivion - $120 mil. budget: $286 million worldwide (2.3x)

Jack Reacher - $60 mil. budget: $218 million worldwide (3.5x)

 

Also, Jack Reacher has a sequel scheduled for 2017. So, clearly considered a success.

 

 

Someone posted here that the minimum global multiplier for true profitability (given the cuts that distributors and others take) is 2.6.

 

Jack Reacher was going to get a sequel regardless. Cruise owns the rights and is an exec. producer (as he is with Mission Impossible). It wasn't a blockbuster, but it didn't lose money either. Only a complete failure would stop Cruise from moving forward one of his owned properties. Most likely he had a multi-picture deal in place with some guarantees of theater numbers, distribution width and sequel guarantees based on basic benchmarks.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

 

Yes they made a very good movie with GOTG but IM2, IM3 and both Thors weren't exactly great.

 

I liked all those stinkers.

 

could be worse, you could like the band Creed and then you'd really have problems

 

I think all Canadians love Nickleback, actually.

[TheLiamSturgess]

 

Yes they made a very good movie with GOTG but IM2, IM3 and both Thors weren't exactly great.

 

I liked all those stinkers.

 

could be worse, you could like the band Creed and then you'd really have problems

 

I think all Canadians love Nickleback, actually.

 

Sadly, we're few and far in between.

[TheLiamSturgess]

Maybe the Fantastic Four are just hard to translate on screen?

 

No, that's not it. The first effort was low-budget and pre-CGI; you get what you pay. The second effort was lazy (rubber Thing suit; Galactus-as-a-cloud) and miscast (bubble-bleach-blond playing Sue Storm; hyper Reed Richards; metrosexual version of Victor Von Doom with trimmed eyebrows). This third effort, based on the 8 or so reviews that I have read on RT, point to two problems: a bland -script and a director who was in over his head. (Fox thought Trank was the next Steven Spielberg, gambled and lost.)

 

If GOTG can be one of the greatest super-hero films ever made, FF -- done correctly -- can be an outstanding franchise. At this point there is no doubt Fox will pull the plug on any sequel plans involving the current iteration. The real question is whether Fox will throw in the towel and work out some deal with Marvel Studios.

 

I sort of disagree. I think the FF have aged really poorly. In the 60s, they were groundbreaking. They were the glue that held the universe together. Into the Byrne era, that was still partly true. Since then, we've seen a book that has never maintained sales and their role in the universe has dwindled to the point that their own book was cancelled.

 

The elements that made the FF so great in the 60s were applied to everything. Now they just aren't unique and storylines and characters in The Avengers can serve the main purpose.

 

I honestly think the FF just don't reach the same level of interest and haven't in a long time.

 

Personally, the thing to do in my mind is make them part of the larger universe. Use Reed as the scientist and expert going into the Infinity Gauntlet. Bring Skrulls and Galactus into the Avengers universe. I'd also play up Sue Storm. Marvel has been criticized for being sexist- Sue is the perfect catalyst to that idea.

 

That is all dependent on Marvel getting the rights back or Fox making a Spidey like deal with Marvel.

 

This is what I'm pushing for, too. Don't give them another solo movie, just do a good job of integrating the characters as supporting cast (ala Hulk) into the Marvel movies.

[fantastic_four]

 

Yes they made a very good movie with GOTG but IM2, IM3 and both Thors weren't exactly great.

 

I liked all those stinkers.

 

could be worse, you could like the band Creed and then you'd really have problems

 

Oh come on, "Higher" was a fine song in its day.

[Mr Sneeze]

Maybe the Fantastic Four are just hard to translate on screen?

 

No, that's not it. The first effort was low-budget and pre-CGI; you get what you pay. The second effort was lazy (rubber Thing suit; Galactus-as-a-cloud) and miscast (bubble-bleach-blond playing Sue Storm; hyper Reed Richards; metrosexual version of Victor Von Doom with trimmed eyebrows). This third effort, based on the 8 or so reviews that I have read on RT, point to two problems: a bland -script and a director who was in over his head. (Fox thought Trank was the next Steven Spielberg, gambled and lost.)

 

If GOTG can be one of the greatest super-hero films ever made, FF -- done correctly -- can be an outstanding franchise. At this point there is no doubt Fox will pull the plug on any sequel plans involving the current iteration. The real question is whether Fox will throw in the towel and work out some deal with Marvel Studios.

 

I sort of disagree. I think the FF have aged really poorly. In the 60s, they were groundbreaking. They were the glue that held the universe together. Into the Byrne era, that was still partly true. Since then, we've seen a book that has never maintained sales and their role in the universe has dwindled to the point that their own book was cancelled.

 

The elements that made the FF so great in the 60s were applied to everything. Now they just aren't unique and storylines and characters in The Avengers can serve the main purpose.

 

I honestly think the FF just don't reach the same level of interest and haven't in a long time.

 

Personally, the thing to do in my mind is make them part of the larger universe. Use Reed as the scientist and expert going into the Infinity Gauntlet. Bring Skrulls and Galactus into the Avengers universe. I'd also play up Sue Storm. Marvel has been criticized for being sexist- Sue is the perfect catalyst to that idea.

 

That is all dependent on Marvel getting the rights back or Fox making a Spidey like deal with Marvel.

 

This is what I'm pushing for, too. Don't give them another solo movie, just do a good job of integrating the characters as supporting cast (ala Hulk) into the Marvel movies.

 

While I wouldn't want to see yet another origin/reboot movie I wouldn't want to see the team split up. I don't blame the FF for a poor screenplay or bad writing but unfortunately they are often the victims of it.

[TheLiamSturgess]

Maybe the Fantastic Four are just hard to translate on screen?

 

No, that's not it. The first effort was low-budget and pre-CGI; you get what you pay. The second effort was lazy (rubber Thing suit; Galactus-as-a-cloud) and miscast (bubble-bleach-blond playing Sue Storm; hyper Reed Richards; metrosexual version of Victor Von Doom with trimmed eyebrows). This third effort, based on the 8 or so reviews that I have read on RT, point to two problems: a bland -script and a director who was in over his head. (Fox thought Trank was the next Steven Spielberg, gambled and lost.)

 

If GOTG can be one of the greatest super-hero films ever made, FF -- done correctly -- can be an outstanding franchise. At this point there is no doubt Fox will pull the plug on any sequel plans involving the current iteration. The real question is whether Fox will throw in the towel and work out some deal with Marvel Studios.

 

I sort of disagree. I think the FF have aged really poorly. In the 60s, they were groundbreaking. They were the glue that held the universe together. Into the Byrne era, that was still partly true. Since then, we've seen a book that has never maintained sales and their role in the universe has dwindled to the point that their own book was cancelled.

 

The elements that made the FF so great in the 60s were applied to everything. Now they just aren't unique and storylines and characters in The Avengers can serve the main purpose.

 

I honestly think the FF just don't reach the same level of interest and haven't in a long time.

 

Personally, the thing to do in my mind is make them part of the larger universe. Use Reed as the scientist and expert going into the Infinity Gauntlet. Bring Skrulls and Galactus into the Avengers universe. I'd also play up Sue Storm. Marvel has been criticized for being sexist- Sue is the perfect catalyst to that idea.

 

That is all dependent on Marvel getting the rights back or Fox making a Spidey like deal with Marvel.

 

This is what I'm pushing for, too. Don't give them another solo movie, just do a good job of integrating the characters as supporting cast (ala Hulk) into the Marvel movies.

 

While I wouldn't want to see yet another origin/reboot movie I wouldn't want to see the team split up. I don't blame the FF for a poor screenplay or bad writing but unfortunately they are often the victims of it.

 

Maybe there's room for a soft reboot. Technically, they could assume the events of the first movie had already taken place, with Doom introduced (but before the introduction of the Surfer or Galactus) or some version of the above. Then, as they plan to with Spider-Man, do a non-origin story that introduces audiences to the new status quo for the characters (and the new actors) but also introducing a new, MCU-relevant storyline that moves the characters forward from the previous attempts.

[Bosco685]

 

On Tuesday’s Live with Kelly and Michael, Mara explained that the cast was not met with the most welcome arms at San Diego Comic Con last month.

 

"We spent a whole day there, sort of working and doing press, and you don't really get to meet the fans. So the next morning, Jamie Bell and I decided, 'Well, we want the experience of Comic-Con. So let's just go out, let's walk to get a coffee amongst all of the fans.'"

 

Initially, Mara and the cast thought this would be a bad idea, but after the fact, the cast (jokingly) realized that nobody even noticed,

 

"And we were like, 'Well, maybe this is a bad idea. We'll get mobbed and it'll be crazy,' and not one person...not one person noticed us," she said, laughing.

 

That's sad.