bane Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 If Fox can produce a Fantastic Four movie that rivals X-Men First Class and DoFP... how can anyone complain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paperheart Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 If Fox can produce a Fantastic Four movie that rivals X-Men First Class and DoFP... how can anyone complain? they can? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bane Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 If Fox can produce a Fantastic Four movie that rivals X-Men First Class and DoFP... how can anyone complain? they can? You expect history to repeat itself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mephisto Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 If Fox can produce a Fantastic Four movie that rivals X-Men First Class and DoFP... how can anyone complain? Did not like Days of the Future Past so I can and will continue to complain about the Fantastic Four under Fox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bane Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 If Fox can produce a Fantastic Four movie that rivals X-Men First Class and DoFP... how can anyone complain? Did not like Days of the Future Past so I can and will continue to complain about the Fantastic Four under Fox. Each to his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marvelcollector Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Is Johnny Storm adopted? Nope. They went the other way. Sue Storm is adopted. Sue Storm adopted. Because an African American family adopting a white child is much more common. These "film makers" are pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimjum12 Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 (edited) I'm not bothered by Johnny being black..... as long as they don't kill him off right when I start liking him.... like most filmmakers seem to do every damn time..... Judy and I look at each other and go "uh, oh..... we're starting to like this black character so that means he'll die in the next 15 minutes". GOD BLESS... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u Edited May 2, 2015 by jimjum12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdoginohio Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Guys, it was a joke. Tried to lighten the mood a little. Guess I'm better at complaining about these films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gatsby77 Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 I was excited for this movie, particularly based on the latest trailer. Until yesterday. Multiple sources are now reporting that Trank was fired from his Star Wars movie because of his "erractic" and unreliable behavior on FF -- lack of leadership, inability to answer questions from the crew, coming to the set late and high on cocaine. So now they're noting that editing duties were essentially taken away from him in post-production _and_ reshoots were required in "late April," (i.e., within the last two weeks). There's really no way to spin that all positively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEnglandGothic Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 I wonder if this FF reboot will beat Ryan Reynolds Green Lantern movie Domestic Total Gross: $116,601,172? If it can`t beat that it will be considered a bomb. So if it beats that is it considered a success? What does one have to do with another? If Green Lantern is considered a bomb by Warner Bros standards, than what if the new FF can`t beat that? What if the new FF reboot can`t beat each of the first two FF movies box office domestically? What if the new FF reboot can`t beat 100 million domestically? Remember FF Rise of the Surfer did $131,921,738. Green Lantern movie did : $116,601,172 If this FF reboot falls in that range it`s a bomb. Way off topic, but I was always fascinated with this coincidence (and my date forced me to go to the latter movie). Green Lantern's WW haul was an estimated $219.8 million ($200 mil. budget) and a couple of weeks later the Selena Gomez vehicle Monte Carlo ($20 mil. budget) was released, finally grossing 39.6 WW. Despite Green Lantern, reaching over $200+ million and a heavy merchandising campaign, they turned in almost the same amount of profit world wide. Does that make the fact Monte Carlo recouped itself the bigger hit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gatsby77 Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Um...yes. Both %-wise and in expectations. Studios both expect and need their tentpole films to be profitable to help balance the losses of other smaller films throughout the year. Hence why Superman Returns was considered a "failure" despite grossing $391 million worldwide vs. its $270 million production budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 From 04/07/15 If a studio can't promote a superhero movie in this day and age they either don't know what they're doing or the movie is a turd they're hiding in hopes that they get some ticket buyer's on name alone. If you look at the ad campaign's Fox had for their 2015 release's so far - Taken 3, Kingsman, and Unfinished Business - it was a media blanket that started months before they came out. Where's the FF? Anyone who's seen a movie in the last month has seen an EXTENSIVE trailer for Hitman: Agent 47 that shows a ton of action. It's a FULL trailer. And it comes out almost a month after the FF. Something is amiss. It's not a guessing game, this is the way it works in Hollywood. Next step is they hold it back from pre-release screening to critics and they drag their feet on what the budget is, OR they go back and do more filming to try and spice it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehumantorch Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 don't read anything into this but Josh Trank is off the Star Wars sequel Interesting. This article is now saying he was fired from Star Wars because of the Fantastic Four problems. Inside Star Wars firing. Everything about this article screams massive mess and failure. They're not making a superhero movie, they're making a disaster movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEnglandGothic Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 From 04/07/15 If a studio can't promote a superhero movie in this day and age they either don't know what they're doing or the movie is a turd they're hiding in hopes that they get some ticket buyer's on name alone. If you look at the ad campaign's Fox had for their 2015 release's so far - Taken 3, Kingsman, and Unfinished Business - it was a media blanket that started months before they came out. Where's the FF? Anyone who's seen a movie in the last month has seen an EXTENSIVE trailer for Hitman: Agent 47 that shows a ton of action. It's a FULL trailer. And it comes out almost a month after the FF. Something is amiss. It's not a guessing game, this is the way it works in Hollywood. Next step is they hold it back from pre-release screening to critics and they drag their feet on what the budget is, OR they go back and do more filming to try and spice it up. Not every movie that does this is doomed. 1982 Poltergeist Rumored Spielberg took over for Tobe Hooper. That turned out fine (the reboot coming out this summer), even despite one of the stars getting murdered by her jealous boyfriend before or after (I forget) the film's immediate release. If that happened nowadays though... Don't worry about the box-office numbers. It still was a good movie, I'm still scared of clown dolls to this day even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marvelcollector Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 I was excited for this movie, particularly based on the latest trailer. Until yesterday. Multiple sources are now reporting that Trank was fired from his Star Wars movie because of his "erractic" and unreliable behavior on FF -- lack of leadership, inability to answer questions from the crew, coming to the set late and high on cocaine. So now they're noting that editing duties were essentially taken away from him in post-production _and_ reshoots were required in "late April," (i.e., within the last two weeks). There's really no way to spin that all positively. This actually explains a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEnglandGothic Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 I was excited for this movie, particularly based on the latest trailer. Until yesterday. Multiple sources are now reporting that Trank was fired from his Star Wars movie because of his "erractic" and unreliable behavior on FF -- lack of leadership, inability to answer questions from the crew, coming to the set late and high on cocaine. So now they're noting that editing duties were essentially taken away from him in post-production _and_ reshoots were required in "late April," (i.e., within the last two weeks). There's really no way to spin that all positively. This actually explains a lot. If any of this is is true, he'll just be forgiven in Hollywood down the road and his current alleged struggle with the 'craft' will look all the more poignant for other filmmakers, critics and audiences. That authentic pain behind the lens trying to assemble bloated monstrosities might just lead to more serious work too. The wheels on the bus go round and round... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 From 04/07/15 If a studio can't promote a superhero movie in this day and age they either don't know what they're doing or the movie is a turd they're hiding in hopes that they get some ticket buyer's on name alone. If you look at the ad campaign's Fox had for their 2015 release's so far - Taken 3, Kingsman, and Unfinished Business - it was a media blanket that started months before they came out. Where's the FF? Anyone who's seen a movie in the last month has seen an EXTENSIVE trailer for Hitman: Agent 47 that shows a ton of action. It's a FULL trailer. And it comes out almost a month after the FF. Something is amiss. It's not a guessing game, this is the way it works in Hollywood. Next step is they hold it back from pre-release screening to critics and they drag their feet on what the budget is, OR they go back and do more filming to try and spice it up. Not every movie that does this is doomed. 1982 Poltergeist Rumored Spielberg took over for Tobe Hooper. That turned out fine (the reboot coming out this summer), even despite one of the stars getting murdered by her jealous boyfriend before or after (I forget) the film's immediate release. If that happened nowadays though... Don't worry about the box-office numbers. It still was a good movie, I'm still scared of clown dolls to this day even. Nowhere near the same. This movie WISHES it could get some publicity like Spielberg might take over the movie. And Spielberg's forceful presence on Poltergeist had nothing to do with Hooper's inadequacies. That's just Spielberg. And Tobe Hooper had already created a masterpiece of horror in Texas Chainsaw Massacre which did $30M ($143M adjusted for 2015) on practically no budget. Poltergeist had a budget of 10.7 million dollars ($26.2 adjusted for 2015).... that's a spit in the bucket. Fantastic Four is at least $200 million and they're still not even sure how to promote it. This movie has disaster written all over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEnglandGothic Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 From 04/07/15 If a studio can't promote a superhero movie in this day and age they either don't know what they're doing or the movie is a turd they're hiding in hopes that they get some ticket buyer's on name alone. If you look at the ad campaign's Fox had for their 2015 release's so far - Taken 3, Kingsman, and Unfinished Business - it was a media blanket that started months before they came out. Where's the FF? Anyone who's seen a movie in the last month has seen an EXTENSIVE trailer for Hitman: Agent 47 that shows a ton of action. It's a FULL trailer. And it comes out almost a month after the FF. Something is amiss. It's not a guessing game, this is the way it works in Hollywood. Next step is they hold it back from pre-release screening to critics and they drag their feet on what the budget is, OR they go back and do more filming to try and spice it up. Not every movie that does this is doomed. 1982 Poltergeist Rumored Spielberg took over for Tobe Hooper. That turned out fine (the reboot coming out this summer), even despite one of the stars getting murdered by her jealous boyfriend before or after (I forget) the film's immediate release. If that happened nowadays though... Don't worry about the box-office numbers. It still was a good movie, I'm still scared of clown dolls to this day even. Nowhere near the same. This movie WISHES it could get some publicity like Spielberg might take over the movie. And Spielberg's forceful presence on Poltergeist had nothing to do with Hooper's inadequacies. That's just Spielberg. And Tobe Hooper had already created a masterpiece of horror in Texas Chainsaw Massacre which did $30M ($143M adjusted for 2015) on practically no budget. Poltergeist had a budget of 10.7 million dollars ($26.2 adjusted for 2015).... that's a spit in the bucket. Fantastic Four is at least $200 million and they're still not even sure how to promote it. This movie has disaster written all over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VintageComics Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 From 04/07/15 If a studio can't promote a superhero movie in this day and age they either don't know what they're doing or the movie is a turd they're hiding in hopes that they get some ticket buyer's on name alone. If you look at the ad campaign's Fox had for their 2015 release's so far - Taken 3, Kingsman, and Unfinished Business - it was a media blanket that started months before they came out. Where's the FF? Anyone who's seen a movie in the last month has seen an EXTENSIVE trailer for Hitman: Agent 47 that shows a ton of action. It's a FULL trailer. And it comes out almost a month after the FF. Something is amiss. It's not a guessing game, this is the way it works in Hollywood. Next step is they hold it back from pre-release screening to critics and they drag their feet on what the budget is, OR they go back and do more filming to try and spice it up. Not every movie that does this is doomed. 1982 Poltergeist Rumored Spielberg took over for Tobe Hooper. That turned out fine (the reboot coming out this summer), even despite one of the stars getting murdered by her jealous boyfriend before or after (I forget) the film's immediate release. If that happened nowadays though... Don't worry about the box-office numbers. It still was a good movie, I'm still scared of clown dolls to this day even. Nowhere near the same. This movie WISHES it could get some publicity like Spielberg might take over the movie. And Spielberg's forceful presence on Poltergeist had nothing to do with Hooper's inadequacies. That's just Spielberg. And Tobe Hooper had already created a masterpiece of horror in Texas Chainsaw Massacre which did $30M ($143M adjusted for 2015) on practically no budget. Poltergeist had a budget of 10.7 million dollars ($26.2 adjusted for 2015).... that's a spit in the bucket. Fantastic Four is at least $200 million and they're still not even sure how to promote it. This movie has disaster written all over it. I have to agree with you. Marvel and DC are pumping tidbits of movies that are still years away - YEARS - and pumping them hard. This movie which is due a few months away is still a mystery. More than that, I tend to have a nose for movies (at least I think I do). It's sort of a 'six sense' I use for picking movies and it's generally reasonably accurate. Movies that I really want to see generally end up being at least decent movies (both by my opinion and the general public's). Those that smell like a stinker to me are generally real stinkers (like Ghost Rider). All I really need to do is see a few pics from the movie, see who is acting in it and watch a trailer and I get a pretty good idea of what will or won't be good. If it's not a well known franchise where the name doesn't carry any weight sometimes even just hearing the title is often enough to give it away for me. I can safely say that for this movie I have not been impressed. I'm going to predict that it's probably not going to be awesome. Real shame since the FF was one of my favorite titles since I was a kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 From 04/07/15 If a studio can't promote a superhero movie in this day and age they either don't know what they're doing or the movie is a turd they're hiding in hopes that they get some ticket buyer's on name alone. If you look at the ad campaign's Fox had for their 2015 release's so far - Taken 3, Kingsman, and Unfinished Business - it was a media blanket that started months before they came out. Where's the FF? Anyone who's seen a movie in the last month has seen an EXTENSIVE trailer for Hitman: Agent 47 that shows a ton of action. It's a FULL trailer. And it comes out almost a month after the FF. Something is amiss. It's not a guessing game, this is the way it works in Hollywood. Next step is they hold it back from pre-release screening to critics and they drag their feet on what the budget is, OR they go back and do more filming to try and spice it up. Not every movie that does this is doomed. 1982 Poltergeist Rumored Spielberg took over for Tobe Hooper. That turned out fine (the reboot coming out this summer), even despite one of the stars getting murdered by her jealous boyfriend before or after (I forget) the film's immediate release. If that happened nowadays though... Don't worry about the box-office numbers. It still was a good movie, I'm still scared of clown dolls to this day even. Nowhere near the same. This movie WISHES it could get some publicity like Spielberg might take over the movie. And Spielberg's forceful presence on Poltergeist had nothing to do with Hooper's inadequacies. That's just Spielberg. And Tobe Hooper had already created a masterpiece of horror in Texas Chainsaw Massacre which did $30M ($143M adjusted for 2015) on practically no budget. Poltergeist had a budget of 10.7 million dollars ($26.2 adjusted for 2015).... that's a spit in the bucket. Fantastic Four is at least $200 million and they're still not even sure how to promote it. This movie has disaster written all over it. Now I want to go and watch the original Poltergeist... it's been awhile... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
