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

[Chris_Skeleton]

Can Marvel sue Fox for wrecking their awesome characters?

 

Remember, Marvels name is still attached to this movie. Fox basically just hurt the Marvel brand. Does Marvel really want their logo at the start of this movie? Can they remove it?

 

No way any kind of lawsuit can go through, but I was wondering how bad this will hurt Marvel Studios films. Does the general public differentiate between Marvel studios and other Marvel based films from Sony and Fox, etc.?

 

I sincerely doubt it. I think once people hear it sucks, they'll just ignore it and see Pixels instead. The Marvel logo is only attached to it very briefly and loosely.

 

The people who care about the MCU understand the difference at this point.

 

And "The people who care about the MCU" are not the majority. Like I said, does the general public know the difference between Marvel Studios films and Fox's Marvel films?

[Goldeneye]

I went out earlier this evening to see the film. While I am sure to be in a very very very very very very small minority - I actually thought it was pretty good. I thought it played well from beginning to end. To each his own I guess.

 

Can you elaborate a little about the things you specifically liked, and how it "played well". Many critics have stated that it actually starts ok, but falls off the tracks in the last 1/3 of the movie. Since you are the 1st person I've heard that likes it, I just wanted to hear a little bit more of your take on it.

 

I have a thought that most people are going into it with such low expectations now that it is playing better than their low expectations.

 

Difficult to say because I was aware of the bad press/reviews so I had this idea that it was going to start off well but go off the rails at some point. That being said the movie made it's own logical progression that made sense - to me at least. If Trank's vision was messed with then I am sure a darker scarier movie lies underneath because this movie plays as a horror story - in a way. My instinct tells me this had more of an arthouse direction and if that's the case it's too bad they didn't go with it (purely speculation on my part). I think this could have been really cool and I still think it's pretty cool. I would really like to see the film from a year ago!

 

But! This is not the FF of the masses and I think that's where a lot of the negativity is coming from and fair enough.

 

A few things I liked...

 

I thought it was well acted throughout - not just at the beginning.

Sue was a powerful member of the team - Byrne's greatest modification/change to the FF!

I thought the Thing was really well done, I thought there was a pathos there, I felt like Reed felt truly horrible for doing that to him.

 

I don't go to superhero movies with as critical an eye as I may view other films so I can be quite forgiving of the genre. Though it's plausible the low expectations played a part in my enjoyment I think I would of liked the film anyways and I certainly do not want to sound apologetic for liking it.

 

I liked the film as well. Here is what I liked about the film the overall casting of the film with exception of Tim Blake Nelson. The cast felt liked they came together from the start. Reg E. Cathey and Kate Mara's performances were the standouts.

 

The fresh new take on how the team came to be focusing on childhood through Reed getting a scholarship and going to college. The building of the machine, testing, and the board.

 

The exact reason the team came to be did they want to be and why they broke protocol.

 

The subtle undertones of why Doom and Richards come to hate each other.

 

The effects and way the characters look like The Thing was fantastic.

 

One of the best reasons for me is they decided to try and not go overboard with character development once they got powers Hey look what I can do.

 

The film is going great all the way up to Doom is recovered. I think what follows in the film should of been longer with a bit more development. I just don't think the villain or sense of impending Doom is in the film long enough to be suspenseful and do the film justice. So I will say this is 75 percent to 95 percent are in the film.

 

The way the film ended felt fine. I would give a 7/10 the audience who came out of the theater was talking positive about the film as well except for the climax area they all wanted more there.

 

Can I see why people hate this film sure it is not for Die Hard FF fans, people who hate high school feeling like films, people who hate Twilight, and people who want so much character development that the film takes close to 3 hours to watch. I guess maybe they wanted Herbie the Robot in the film instead.

 

What you got was absolutely new fresh take on a superhero team people were use to seeing the same origins.

 

In my book it is better than the previous efforts for Fantastic Four and better than the first Avengers film that I left the theater absolutely hating.

 

 

[Ogami]

Can Marvel sue Fox for wrecking their awesome characters?

 

Remember, Marvels name is still attached to this movie. Fox basically just hurt the Marvel brand. Does Marvel really want their logo at the start of this movie? Can they remove it?

 

One reviewer called this a "Marvel movie" which I think is unfair and ignorant.

[Goldeneye]

Can Marvel sue Fox for wrecking their awesome characters?

 

Remember, Marvels name is still attached to this movie. Fox basically just hurt the Marvel brand. Does Marvel really want their logo at the start of this movie? Can they remove it?

 

No way any kind of lawsuit can go through, but I was wondering how bad this will hurt Marvel Studios films. Does the general public differentiate between Marvel studios and other Marvel based films from Sony and Fox, etc.?

 

I sincerely doubt it. I think once people hear it sucks, they'll just ignore it and see Pixels instead. The Marvel logo is only attached to it very briefly and loosely.

 

The people who care about the MCU understand the difference at this point.

 

And "The people who care about the MCU" are not the majority. Like I said, does the general public know the difference between Marvel Studios films and Fox's Marvel films?

 

No they do not, in fact a lot of the average moviegoer could not tell you which character is from which Universe. Which is why an unfaithful adaptation as long as written, acted, and produced well could at anytime become the cannon version of what people accept about a character.

[Ogami]

At this pont, my opinion of Trank is extremely low.

[Mr Sneeze]

I went out earlier this evening to see the film. While I am sure to be in a very very very very very very small minority - I actually thought it was pretty good. I thought it played well from beginning to end. To each his own I guess.

 

Can you elaborate a little about the things you specifically liked, and how it "played well". Many critics have stated that it actually starts ok, but falls off the tracks in the last 1/3 of the movie. Since you are the 1st person I've heard that likes it, I just wanted to hear a little bit more of your take on it.

 

I have a thought that most people are going into it with such low expectations now that it is playing better than their low expectations.

 

Difficult to say because I was aware of the bad press/reviews so I had this idea that it was going to start off well but go off the rails at some point. That being said the movie made it's own logical progression that made sense - to me at least. If Trank's vision was messed with then I am sure a darker scarier movie lies underneath because this movie plays as a horror story - in a way. My instinct tells me this had more of an arthouse direction and if that's the case it's too bad they didn't go with it (purely speculation on my part). I think this could have been really cool and I still think it's pretty cool. I would really like to see the film from a year ago!

 

But! This is not the FF of the masses and I think that's where a lot of the negativity is coming from and fair enough.

 

A few things I liked...

 

I thought it was well acted throughout - not just at the beginning.

Sue was a powerful member of the team - Byrne's greatest modification/change to the FF!

I thought the Thing was really well done, I thought there was a pathos there, I felt like Reed felt truly horrible for doing that to him.

 

I don't go to superhero movies with as critical an eye as I may view other films so I can be quite forgiving of the genre. Though it's plausible the low expectations played a part in my enjoyment I think I would of liked the film anyways and I certainly do not want to sound apologetic for liking it.

 

I liked the film as well. Here is what I liked about the film the overall casting of the film with exception of Tim Blake Nelson. The cast felt liked they came together from the start. Reg E. Cathey and Kate Mara's performances were the standouts.

 

The fresh new take on how the team came to be focusing on childhood through Reed getting a scholarship and going to college. The building of the machine, testing, and the board.

 

The exact reason the team came to be did they want to be and why they broke protocol.

 

The subtle undertones of why Doom and Richards come to hate each other.

 

The effects and way the characters look like The Thing was fantastic.

 

One of the best reasons for me is they decided to try and not go overboard with character development once they got powers Hey look what I can do.

 

The film is going great all the way up to Doom is recovered. I think what follows in the film should of been longer with a bit more development. I just don't think the villain or sense of impending Doom is in the film long enough to be suspenseful and do the film justice. So I will say this is 75 percent to 95 percent are in the film.

 

The way the film ended felt fine. I would give a 7/10 the audience who came out of the theater was talking positive about the film as well except for the climax area they all wanted more there.

 

Can I see why people hate this film sure it is not for Die Hard FF fans, people who hate high school feeling like films, people who hate Twilight, and people who want so much character development that the film takes close to 3 hours to watch. I guess maybe they wanted Herbie the Robot in the film instead.

 

What you got was absolutely new fresh take on a superhero team people were use to seeing the same origins.

 

In my book it is better than the previous efforts for Fantastic Four and better than the first Avengers film that I left the theater absolutely hating.

 

 

Definitely better than the previous FF outings. I went to a low priced theatre that was about 1/4 full. Most people seemed to enjoy it but also I also heard mention that it was a quick movie. It is different from any superhero film that I can think of and the horror aspect took me completely by surprise. And again, the Thing was fantastic - even sans you know what.... just didn't seem to be an issue.

[cloud cloddie]

Can Marvel sue Fox for wrecking their awesome characters?

 

Remember, Marvels name is still attached to this movie. Fox basically just hurt the Marvel brand. Does Marvel really want their logo at the start of this movie? Can they remove it?

 

No way any kind of lawsuit can go through, but I was wondering how bad this will hurt Marvel Studios films. Does the general public differentiate between Marvel studios and other Marvel based films from Sony and Fox, etc.?

 

I sincerely doubt it. I think once people hear it sucks, they'll just ignore it and see Pixels instead. The Marvel logo is only attached to it very briefly and loosely.

 

The people who care about the MCU understand the difference at this point.

 

And "The people who care about the MCU" are not the majority. Like I said, does the general public know the difference between Marvel Studios films and Fox's Marvel films?

 

Why wouldn't the general public know? Marvel/Disney has obviously made a lot of success interconnecting most of the movies. From that aspect alone, most would know. They also do a lot of 'from the studio that brought you' in trailers. I'd think the percentage of people who know the studios is greater than not.

[paperheart]

Box Office has adjusted its forecast based on the early results.

 

NORTH AMERICA UPDATE #2: Early Weekend Projections: 'Fantastic Four' Disappoints; 'The Gift' Surprises

 

Friday Update #2: According to various sources, Fantastic Four looks to be on pace for only $31 million-$33 million during its debut frame. Poor reviews and negative buzz coming off Thursday evening shows are both having an impact. Mission: Impossible -- Rogue Nation could end up finishing in first again if F4 hits the low end of projections.

 

The Gift is set for a solid $9 million and could get even higher if positive word of mouth continues to spread. Ricki and the Flash looking at an $8 million debut, while Shaun the Sheep should hit around $6 million.

 

Unmitigated disaster. Trank just received a huge thank you from Kevin feige. The ff will be coming home.

 

At least Amazing Spider-Man 2 may have made some money, though a dog. I finally found a credible source that captured the production and PAE.

 

Should Sony Panic About The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Box Office Sales?

 

Amazing Spider-Man 2 reportedly had a production budget of $255 million and a marketing budget of at least $180 million. That means Sony is looking at a small profit on the pic.

 

Based on those numbers, even if you gave them 75% of the American Box and 50% of the Foreign Box, that's still a loss.

 

If you are talking box office only, that would be correct but I was shocked to see some of the other revenue sources. Foreign and domestic dvd sales were something like $90mm w/ 90% margins. Deadline did a detailed analysis of 20 movies from 2014 and ASM 2 was #18 iirc and was profitable to the tune of $70mm.

 

[TheLiamSturgess]

Can Marvel sue Fox for wrecking their awesome characters?

 

Remember, Marvels name is still attached to this movie. Fox basically just hurt the Marvel brand. Does Marvel really want their logo at the start of this movie? Can they remove it?

 

No way any kind of lawsuit can go through, but I was wondering how bad this will hurt Marvel Studios films. Does the general public differentiate between Marvel studios and other Marvel based films from Sony and Fox, etc.?

 

I sincerely doubt it. I think once people hear it sucks, they'll just ignore it and see Pixels instead. The Marvel logo is only attached to it very briefly and loosely.

 

The people who care about the MCU understand the difference at this point.

 

And "The people who care about the MCU" are not the majority. Like I said, does the general public know the difference between Marvel Studios films and Fox's Marvel films?

 

Why wouldn't the general public know? Marvel/Disney has obviously made a lot of success interconnecting most of the movies. From that aspect alone, most would know. They also do a lot of 'from the studio that brought you' in trailers. I'd think the percentage of people who know the studios is greater than not.

 

+1

 

My point was that the people not in the know don't care. The people who care are largely in the know.

[Gatsby77]

I don't think the general audience knows (or cares) which studio did the film.

 

The same way that, as a Bond fan, I get pissed that critics don't count Never Say Never Again or the 1967 Casino Royale just because they weren't produced by Albert Broccoli.

 

Particularly with Never Say Never Again -- sure it was a remake, but it should count as an official Bond film, even if Eon doesn't own the rights & wishes it didn't exist.

 

Incidentally, it's only because of the 2013 legal settlement re. Thunderball that Blofeld can once again appear in this November's Spectre -- the Brocolis hadn't own the rights for decades.

 

From the dozens of reviews I've read, this is a solid FF film up to the last third. And critics are calling a 2 to 2.5 star movie. So it's mediocre & a missed opportunity, but nowhere near 1 star bad (a la Catwoman or Jonah Hex).

 

Sort of like...most of the Roger Moore Bond films.

 

 

[paperheart]

I don't think the general audience knows (or cares) which studio did the film.

 

The same way that, as a Bond fan, I get pissed that critics don't count Never Say Never Again or the 1967 Casino Royale just because they weren't produced by Albert Broccoli.

 

Particularly with Never Say Never Again -- sure it was a remake, but it should count as an official Bond film, even if Eon doesn't own the rights & wishes it didn't exist.

 

Incidentally, it's only because of the 2013 legal settlement re. Thunderball that Blofeld can once again appear in this November's Spectre -- the Brocolis hadn't own the rights for decades.

 

From the dozens of reviews I've read, this is a solid FF film up to the last third. And critics are calling a 2 to 2.5 star movie. So it's mediocre & a missed opportunity, but nowhere near 1 star bad (a la Catwoman or Jonah Hex).

 

Sort of like...most of the Roger Moore Bond films.

 

 

You are entitled to spin this however you choose but FF's Metacritic score is 27. Cat woman's was 27 and Jonah hex was 33. So according to the top critics, it is that bad.

 

[makeminemego]

Just got back from the 9:35 show at our local Wehrenberg, which was probably about 20% full. The crowd seemed to enjoy the movie, lots of little kids.

 

Is it a good movie? No. Is it hell-on-wheels-Ishtar-in-tights-bad? I didn't think so.

 

Not enough Reed, and he was miscast. Everyone else, I thought did a nice job. Thing really looked pretty good, and I like Jaime Bell as Ben too. His voice modulated to the Thing was an interesting effect and worked pretty well. I don't care about the black HT stuff. He was fine and did a perfectly fine job. Kate Mara's Sue actually was pretty intriguing. But.........

 

Doom. Yikes. Talk about ting the bed......again.

 

Aside from VVD, the biggest problems the movie had were a mediocre -script and a hatchet job in the editing room. The third act is abrupt to say the least.

 

Overall, it's a "C-" in my eyes. Not the FF I've loved my entire life, but then again, taking liberties with comic characters on screen is nothing new. Probably liked it better, as a movie, than Thor: TDW, and both IM sequels. They're all bad probably, but at least this FF was interesting at times.

 

Frankly, it's going to bomb. This is it. No sequels. The word of mouth in the industry alone is crippling, not to mention that the movie, while not as bad as expected, isn't very good or likable.

 

It's a little too bad. Every now and then, I saw something in the movie that I liked. If the movie was just simply BETTER or more likable, enough to generate the buzz for ticket sales and an eventual sequel, maybe it could be an interesting series of pictures. I think they were MAYBE onto something. In fact, I've always thought that the FF just would never translate to film, but there's enough moments to make me think that in the right hands, at the right studio, and with the right -script, it would work fine. I appreciated the horror movie angle played up at times. And I liked the "scientists first, heroes second" approach as well. Better, or at least more interesting than the Tim Story FF flicks from a few years back, but this is the FF, and you've got to do better than this.

 

C- I feel comfortable with that.

Edited August 8, 2015 by makeminemego

[Guardian Comics]

So the kids decided they wanted to go to the Drive-In tonight. Of course what was playing, FF and Vacation. So we went. (I'm giving Fox the money that Chuck G. refuses to give. Three of the five people hadn't seen FF yet, and afterwards everyone was in agreeance that it was very good. An 11 year old girl, a 13 year old girl and woman in her 30's. They really, really liked it. It being my second time in as many days, enjoyed it even more so the second time around. The story between Reed and Ben, and especially Reed and Victor was so well done. Victor and Reed, even though rivals, had become best of friends. Just like I always pictured it was in the Jack and Stan days, until the fateful event. I felt both their pain. I'm sticking by my statement that it was a very good movie. I know it doesn't stand a chance with all the negativity surrounding it but it's not fair to pile on before you see it. See it for yourself and make at least an informed decision before piling on.

 

Jim

[makeminemego]

So the kids decided they wanted to go to the Drive-In tonight. Of course what was playing, FF and Vacation. So we went. (I'm giving Fox the money that Chuck G. refuses to give. Three of the five people hadn't seen FF yet, and afterwards everyone was in agreeance that it was very good. An 11 year old girl, a 13 year old girl and woman in her 30's. They really, really liked it. It being my second time in as many days, enjoyed it even more so the second time around. The story between Reed and Ben, and especially Reed and Victor was so well done. Victor and Reed, even though rivals, had become best of friends. Just like I always pictured it was in the Jack and Stan days, until the fateful event. I felt both their pain. I'm sticking by my statement that it was a very good movie. I know it doesn't stand a chance with all the negativity surrounding it but it's not fair to pile on before you see it. See it for yourself and make at least an informed decision before piling on.

 

Jim

 

While I wasn't as positive about the movie as you were, I wholeheartedly agree that people need to give it a chance, even if only on DVD, before crucifying it at the stake.

 

Not a good movie in my estimation, but the amount of negative press that the movie has received is strange and somewhat unrelated to the quality, or even lack thereof, of the movie itself.

 

[Buzzetta]

I am more astonished that there are still drive In movie theaters... the last drive in movie theater anywhere near me closed in 1998.

[Amadeus Arkham]

Drive-ins rock. Where else can you pay $10 for a double feature and get a hummer at the same time?

[Bosco685]

Box Office has adjusted its forecast based on the early results.

 

NORTH AMERICA UPDATE #2: Early Weekend Projections: 'Fantastic Four' Disappoints; 'The Gift' Surprises

 

Friday Update #2: According to various sources, Fantastic Four looks to be on pace for only $31 million-$33 million during its debut frame. Poor reviews and negative buzz coming off Thursday evening shows are both having an impact. Mission: Impossible -- Rogue Nation could end up finishing in first again if F4 hits the low end of projections.

 

The Gift is set for a solid $9 million and could get even higher if positive word of mouth continues to spread. Ricki and the Flash looking at an $8 million debut, while Shaun the Sheep should hit around $6 million.

 

Unmitigated disaster. Trank just received a huge thank you from Kevin feige. The ff will be coming home.

 

At least Amazing Spider-Man 2 may have made some money, though a dog. I finally found a credible source that captured the production and PAE.

 

Should Sony Panic About The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Box Office Sales?

 

Amazing Spider-Man 2 reportedly had a production budget of $255 million and a marketing budget of at least $180 million. That means Sony is looking at a small profit on the pic.

 

Based on those numbers, even if you gave them 75% of the American Box and 50% of the Foreign Box, that's still a loss.

 

If you are talking box office only, that would be correct but I was shocked to see some of the other revenue sources. Foreign and domestic dvd sales were something like $90mm w/ 90% margins. Deadline did a detailed analysis of 20 movies from 2014 and ASM 2 was #18 iirc and was profitable to the tune of $70mm.

 

Someone at work that purchased the Blu-Ray knew I was a fan of comic book movies. After watching it once, he asked if I wanted it for free. I told him thanks, but no need for such kindness.

 

[Bosco685]

Were Three Huge Action Scenes Cut From FANTASTIC FOUR Before Filming Even Started?

 

John Campea of Collider Movie Talk has recently revealed that multiple sources of 20th Century Fox agreed for Josh Trank to direct his vision of The Fantastic Four - which was described as a very dark Amblin-esque, Cronenberg inspired "tragic tale", displaying the horror of what can come out these transformations before becoming the iconic Fantastic Four. However, merely days before filming, Fox apparently stripped three huge set-pieces from the film! Could this have led to Trank's "destructive behavior" towards the crew and becoming indesive and demanding?

 

But wait, there's more! Campea's sources also revealed that the downfall and utter dreadful third act wasn't Trank's doing and he was actually removed from the editing room entirely! It's suggested Kinberg could've directed those scenes though Trank was still on set. Apparently, it was those removals from that made the film feel abrupt, being described as a puzzle, "once you start moving the pieces it starts to look out of whack."

[NewEnglandGothic]

Box Office has adjusted its forecast based on the early results.

 

NORTH AMERICA UPDATE #2: Early Weekend Projections: 'Fantastic Four' Disappoints; 'The Gift' Surprises

 

Friday Update #2: According to various sources, Fantastic Four looks to be on pace for only $31 million-$33 million during its debut frame. Poor reviews and negative buzz coming off Thursday evening shows are both having an impact. Mission: Impossible -- Rogue Nation could end up finishing in first again if F4 hits the low end of projections.

 

The Gift is set for a solid $9 million and could get even higher if positive word of mouth continues to spread. Ricki and the Flash looking at an $8 million debut, while Shaun the Sheep should hit around $6 million.

 

Unmitigated disaster. Trank just received a huge thank you from Kevin feige. The ff will be coming home.

 

At least Amazing Spider-Man 2 may have made some money, though a dog. I finally found a credible source that captured the production and PAE.

 

Should Sony Panic About The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Box Office Sales?

 

Amazing Spider-Man 2 reportedly had a production budget of $255 million and a marketing budget of at least $180 million. That means Sony is looking at a small profit on the pic.

 

Based on those numbers, even if you gave them 75% of the American Box and 50% of the Foreign Box, that's still a loss.

 

If you are talking box office only, that would be correct but I was shocked to see some of the other revenue sources. Foreign and domestic dvd sales were something like $90mm w/ 90% margins. Deadline did a detailed analysis of 20 movies from 2014 and ASM 2 was #18 iirc and was profitable to the tune of $70mm.

 

Someone at work that purchased the Blu-Ray knew I was a fan of comic book movies. After watching it once, he asked if I wanted it for free. I told him thanks, but no need for such kindness.

 

I bought it on a 'blind buy' myself. I find it's only watchable in pieces, like those 2nd unit sequences in the some of the more blander Roger Moore Bond films of the late 70's in the early 80's. Compared to Batman & Robin, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, The Spirit, Jonah Hex, RIPD, Catwoman and other terrible downright funnybook movies, ASM 2 is a two star movie. Since I don't base any judgement on negative boardies who base their opinions on box-office mojo or Hollywood gossip, I'll take the high road on voicing an opinion on FF before I view it myself. One of my top 100 favorites of all-time was the "mega-dud" movie The 13th Warrior, which always had packed showings, yet only lasted two weeks. :shrug: Another "comic-book"-type dud (critical-financial) I enjoyed from Fox, was Ravenous too.

[Bosco685]

I bought it on a 'blind buy' myself. I find it's only watchable in pieces, like those 2nd unit sequences in the some of the more blander Roger Moore Bond films of the late 70's in the early 80's. Compared to Batman & Robin, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, The Spirit, Jonah Hex, RIPD, Catwoman and other terrible downright funnybook movies, ASM 2 is a two star movie. Since I don't base any judgement on negative boardies who base their opinions on box-office mojo or Hollywood gossip, I'll take the high road on voicing an opinion on FF before I view it myself. One of my top 100 favorites of all-time was the "mega-dud" movie The 13th Warrior, which always had packed showings, yet only lasted two weeks. :shrug: Another "comic-book"-type dud (critical-financial) I enjoyed from Fox, was Ravenous too.

 

Love that movie!