Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 sebster wrote:
[The Thing is going to be motion capture.

I hope so because the last one wasn't. I like Michael Chiklis and thought he was a good choice, but putting him in a Thing suit was a bad choice.

 Ahtman wrote:
I hope so because the last one wasn't. I like Michael Chiklis and thought he was a good choice, but putting him in a Thing suit was a bad choice.

Yeah, it looked mighty crappy.

I wonder if they were influenced by how good the Hellboy suit looked, and for some technical reason the suit just didn't work in the way that Hellboy works, or if they just weren't interested in spending the money to either do the suit right or do CGI.

They should have kept chiklis as the voice. His voice was perfect for Ben.

Seeing the cast, no thank you, Is this a marvel production?
Maybe they should just realease this one

No, it isn't a marvel production. The franchise rights to the Fantastic Four are owned by Fox, who also owns the rights to the X-Men and associated bad-guys (and exclusive rights to She-Hulk, due to her being closely linked to the FF)

 Goliath wrote:
No, it isn't a marvel production. The franchise rights to the Fantastic Four are owned by Fox, who also owns the rights to the X-Men and associated bad-guys (and exclusive rights to She-Hulk, due to her being closely linked to the FF)

Citation? Because I hadn't heard that Fox got Shulkie because she guested in a few X-men issue. If that were true, Disney should have the rights to Spider-man because of all the time he's shown up in an Avengers issue.

squidhills wrote:

 Goliath wrote:
No, it isn't a marvel production. The franchise rights to the Fantastic Four are owned by Fox, who also owns the rights to the X-Men and associated bad-guys (and exclusive rights to She-Hulk, due to her being closely linked to the FF)

Citation? Because I hadn't heard that Fox got Shulkie because she guested in a few X-men issue.

Guest appearances don't constitute being core to that book. I have no idea who has the right to She-hulk.

squidhills wrote:
If that were true, Disney should have the rights to Spider-man because of all the time he's shown up in an Avengers issue.

Again, guest spots don't matter for core books, and what they do in the comics has no say at all on who owns the film rights. Sony has the rights to Spider-man because Marvel made a really bad deal with them (same with Fox) back in the day in which super hero films weren't big business like they are now.

Why do Universal have Namor?

 Paradigm wrote:
Why do Universal have Namor?

Because nobody else would take him?

Namor's not quite Universal. Marvel can make a Namor film without Universal. Kinda. It's complicated, but it's not a case of Marvel being unable to use him.

Goliath wrote:

 focusedfire wrote:

@Goliath-
There is a huge difference between blood sibling relationships and inter-racial adopted sibling relationships. The decision to go this route leads to in-story relationship issues that can only distract and detract from the overall FF as a family dynamic.

Why? Because they're adopted they're not as close as if they were biological siblings?

A)Never said or implied that they could not or would not be close.
B) Said it would distract and detract from the overall FF family dynamic.
By this, I mean that they set the stage for the Johnny and Sue relationship to dominate the FF family dynamic as opposed to being a balanced part.

As I will note below, most of my basis for how this will play out is due to how Hollywood's tends to handle such stories.

focusedfire wrote:

Goliath wrote:Basically, instead of going with a balance of issues/problems between the four characters they are setting up Sue and Johnny's characters to have the lead in what is supposed to be a cast of equals.

How? Because one of them is adopted it means that they somehow have more issues than they would otherwise?

Hope this doesn't hurt your feelings but the statistics say yes, adopted children tend to have more issues. Especially if there is a biological child present and the adopted child is aware that they are adopted.

Please to note that there is currently a strong push,by the scientific community, for much more comprehensive research into the causation of these problems.(Basically, they need a more thorough data set that includes as many variables as possible).

Lastly, The adoption story-line plays into established hollywood dramatic tropes. The studio made the choice to make them either half-brother&sister or adopted for a reason. Considering how hollywood has handled adoption stories in the past I have justified doubts as to how such a story convention will work in the Fantastic Four's family dynamic.

focusedfire wrote:

Goliath wrote:I'd rather Reed was black and that young Johnny showed his immaturity by being a bit racist. This would play into Johnny and Ben's not getting along due to Ben's deep friendship with Reed.
This would also create friendship conflict between Sue and Ben.

Wait, wut? It's not okay to have one of the characters be played by a black man, because reasons, but it's perfectly fine for another character to be black? And to randomly make one of the characters racist? You do get the whole thing about the FF being one big family right? That's kind of ruined by having one of the members think another is subhuman...

A) As you yourself noted, having Micheal B Jordan play the Thing would most likely be viewed as racist.
Why? Because the Thing, normally, can't change back to human form. People could view his not being human as to being the same as him being sub-human on some level.

Now taking a black actor and giving him a primary character that exhibits the most numerous negative streo-typical traits could also be viewed as a racist decision in casting.

Johnny Storm is known for being the least intelligent, most self entitled, show boating glory hog of the group. His big mouth and lack of self control are actually worse than the Things.
These are all bad personality traits that have been applied as negative stereo-types about the African-american community. Only reason people will let it slide as a casting choice is that Johnny Storm has what most people consider to be the best super power.

While the Reed Richards character has many personality flaws, none are flaws that are used as negative African-american stereo-types.

B) I said "maybe have Johnny be a bit racist". It would play into his personality traits and would gove him room to grow as a character.
It would also allow the writers to explore a very intriguing concept of how we define hero's. They can ask the question of whether or not someone who is a known hero stops because of a backward attitude.

Basically, Does someone who risks their life everyday to save people lives regardless of their race stop being a hero if they have a flaw such as a racist or sexist attitude?


C) Yes, I understand that the FF are a family. That includes all the drama and disfuction of an average family with super powers added. Their problems in living, working and relating to one another is the basis of their story.

Please to again note, that I am working from the pov of what and how the Hollywood writers would handles this.

sebster wrote:

 focusedfire wrote:
a Twilight-esque skinny dude playing Ben Grimm

That's a bit like complaining that Andy Serkis doesn't look like a monkey therefore the new Planet of the Apes movies are going to suck. The Thing is going to be motion capture.

I have no problem with a motion capture Thing.

I do have a problem in that this is an origin story where we will likely see Ben Grimm in his human form for a fair bit of the movie.
Ben Grimm's back story is that he was a former college football star(american football) that was built like a cross between a linebacker and fullback.
He then goes on to Join the Marines where he becomes a combat pilot and later a test pilot.

Then there is the matter of the voice. Ben Grimm grew up in the projects of New York. It was a tough childhood that has always been at the core of the character.
This is where the Ben Grimm's street tough attitide and heavy New Yorker accent comes from.

And they picked thin, lanky and soft spoken Brit for the role.

Later,
ff