Thread Manager
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 1
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]463943[/split]
Im not sure I understand what you're saying here. This is probably just me, but it reads like you're contradicting yourself.
Through the years the members of the FF grew and relationships changed. Unless you are introducing us to the team mid-career, having the four start out as peers changes the family dynamic in a fundamental way. It's a great story, and Trank is ignoring it.
1: It's a great story that isn't suited for film. The development you're talking about happened over 20 or so years in a monthly ongoing series. That kind of serialized storytelling is not suited for a film franchise.
2: Them as peers has been the family dynamic for more than half of their existence. For a lot of people who were born after it became the status quo, it's fundamentally how the FF are. I think it's acceptable to start there instead of working up to it, especially in a medium as inherently non-serialized as film.
3: Pretty much every single adaptation of the FF since 1990 has started with the peer dynamic. In that regard, there is nothing special about this film.
Strongly disagree. The Story films didn't do a lot right, but they did get much of the family dynamic right. As did the accompanying animated series. You can't put four similarly aged twenty-something's on screen and expect it to keep what made the FF special. So in this regard, I agree with you. There is nothing special about this film.
Strongly disagree. The Story films didn't do a lot right, but they did get much of the family dynamic right. As did the accompanying animated series. You can't put four similarly aged twenty-something's on screen and expect it to keep what made the FF special. So in this regard, I agree with you. There is nothing special about this film.
As far as age difference, etc....etc....etc.
People keep trying to explain something to make it right for fans of 616 to get on board with. PEOPLE, UNDERSTAND....this isn't a 616 adaptation, because of that those longtime fans of 616 are not going to be happy no matter how many ways you try to spin it. You can say this Marvel movie was from Ultimate, and that Marvel movie was from Ultimate, and it still isn't going to make these fans happy. You are trying to have an omelete that taste good, and you are saying...."see look, the omelet looks great, just because there is one rotten egg in it doesn't mean anything, until you taste it." These fans do not want to taste that omelet.
Like I have said before…I feel the Question is arguing for the sake of arguing.
The Question says he doesn't understand why some people are upset.
People say why they are against the movie.
The Question says explain that better.
People then explain it more thoroughly.
The Question says that's silly.
They explain it again.
The Question says that doesn't make sense to him, please explain it again.
They explain it again.
This has been going on for months…..over and over and over.
As in the post above...people say they don't like the age difference...he asks why...they explain why....he says that doesn't make sense....they explain it more....he again says it is silly to think that way........how many times have different posters given their reasons for not liking that particular point....how many more times are people going to explain that particular point...............
The original dynamic was the product of cultural attitudes about what a family is supposed to be that were unrealistic and that our society has been trying to grow out of for decades. What makes the Fantastic Four special is that they are not a conventional family. Only two of them are blood relatives. But they came together and they made a family for themselves. That's beautiful, and you can do that without a huge age gap.
I'm going to make a Superman film. I'm going to cast Patton Oswald. Instead of him being from Krypton, he's going to get his powers from a genetic experiment, and Lex Luthor is also going to get powers from that same experiment. Clark Kent will work at a Wal-Mart. He didn't grow up on a farm, but grew up in a townhouse outside of Baltimore with an alcoholic, abusive father and a mother who stripped occasionally to cover the bills when his father was out of work. He's not going to have a superman suit. He's going to have something more 'realistic' like a ski-mask and black duster.
But I'm not going to change any of the 'important' things. He's still going to be named Clark Kent and he's still going to fight crime as Superman with all the powers we know Superman to have. Lex Luthor will be his arch enemy. He's still going to be a good, honest guy who fights for truth, justice and the American way.
Could that be a good film? Sure - if it's well-written and well directed, but it's not going to be a 'Superman' film in terms of offering Superman fans the key elements they want.
It's a very simple concept and I don't know what defenders of this film think they're accomplishing by telling FF fans the basic things we want aren't important. They're important to us even if they aren't important to those who have only a casual interest in and knowledge of the characters.
Saying this could be a good film is meaningless. Saying that elements that define the FF aren't important is meaningless.
If the elements that have historically defined the FF aren't present, few if any FF fans will consider this to be a good FF film. Nothing anybody can post on this board will change that simple, basic concept.
If Fox demonstrates that they actually will give us the elements of the FF we want, that could sway some of us, but simply telling us our desires are unimportant or calling us 'Fan Boys' isn't going to convince us of anything.
I'm going to make a Superman film. I'm going to cast Patton Oswald. Instead of him being from Krypton, he's going to get his powers from a genetic experiment, and Lex Luthor is also going to get powers from that same experiment. Clark Kent will work at a Wal-Mart. He didn't grow up on a farm, but grew up in a townhouse outside of Baltimore with an alcoholic, abusive father and a mother who stripped occasionally to cover the bills when his father was out of work. He's not going to have a superman suit. He's going to have something more 'realistic' like a ski-mask and black duster.
But I'm not going to change any of the 'important' things. He's still going to be named Clark Kent and he's still going to fight crime as Superman with all the powers we know Superman to have. Lex Luthor will be his arch enemy. He's still going to be a good, honest guy who fights for truth, justice and the American way.
1: There is zero evidence of changes as drastic as you describe in your hypothetical Superman film in this Fantastic Four movie.
What your described in your Superman analogy is complete hyperbole.
Miles Teller is to Reed Richards as Patton Oswalt is to Superman. I will absolutely stand by that.
I changed Superman's origin because UFF DRAMATICALLY changed the FF's origin and all indications are this film will adopt similar changes.
Clark Kent being a reporter and growing up on a farm is no more important to his character than the relative ages of the FF characters and their back-stories (which were changed dramatically in UFF and all indications are similar changes will be made here).
We have been told they will have 'containment' suits instead of uniforms, so I changed Superman's costume to something more 'grounded' as well.
I gave Lex Luthor powers that were tied to Superman's because that's what UFF did (and by all accounts this film will do) with Doom.
I stand by the idea that the only substantive difference between the changes I made to Superman and the changes we're likely to see in this film are that the changes to this film were set up by the UFF comic book.
I want to stress that at this point, I've grown a little skeptical of the film myself. The low budget and the rushed filming schedule is fairly suspect, and the PR side of things has shown an enormous lack of enthusiasm or direction. But I really do think that a lot of people's reasons for calling this film "FFINO" and assuming it will be terrible are kind of silly. I think it's a game of assumptions, expectations, and mental associations that isn't especially useful or healthy for the criticism and appreciation of film and popular media. In addition, there has been a very consistent theme in these threads of rallying around an identity as "true" Fantastic Four fans, and putting forth the claim that if one does not hold a very particular set of opinions and standards about a property then they are not a true fan and have no place discussing the work, which I find very personally insulting. I am a true Fantastic Four fan. All of you guys are as well. We wouldn't be here if we weren't. That doesn't mean we have to agree.
And like I have said before, you are wrong.
1: None of what you're describing has happened in the exchanges I've had today.
2: I ask a lot of questions when I talk to people who I disagree with, in part to get a better understanding of where they are coming from and in part to try and get them to think about what motivates their opinions without coming right out and saying that because it sounds really smug and pretentious. There's nothing disingenuous about it.
3: Isn't there a rule about not making personal accusations?
None of that happened in the post above. I did not say that I didn't understand why people were upset, Kelly did not explain why she doesn't like age gap, and there were not multiple back and forth exchanges of her explaining it and me asking why. She said that the idea was rotten, I asked why because I do not know why she, specifically, feels that way, and it's better to ask for a clarification of what people mean when they say something than to assume what they meant based on what other people have said. I'm not going to assume that each individual who doesn't like something thinks the same way or has the same reasoning behind their opinions.
Of course, I am almost certain that she has explained her opinion about it in the past, but the thing is that it happened months ago and I do not remember what she said. So, it's better to ask than to just make assumptions based on a hazy memory on one online interaction I had in July.
I want to stress that at this point, I've grown a little skeptical of the film myself. The low budget and the rushed filming schedule is fairly suspect, and the PR side of things has shown an enormous lack of enthusiasm or direction. But I really do think that a lot of people's reasons for calling this film "FFINO" and assuming it will be terrible are kind of silly. I think it's a game of assumptions, expectations, and mental associations that isn't especially useful or healthy for the criticism and appreciation of film and popular media. In addition, there has been a very consistent theme in these threads of rallying around an identity as "true" Fantastic Four fans, and putting forth the claim that if one does not hold a very particular set of opinions and standards about a property then they are not a true fan and have no place discussing the work, which I find very personally insulting. I am a true Fantastic Four fan. All of you guys are as well. We wouldn't be here if we weren't. That doesn't mean we have to agree.
Oh, I agree. You are perfectly welcome to disagree with me on what is the important core of the Fantastic Four and what isn't. I have no expectations that everyone will agree with me.
I also agree with you that there are other warning signs with this film aside from differences from the source material. Even if it was a completely original property, I would be concerned about things like the budget, rushed schedule, and lack of promotion. It it wasn't called Fantastic Four and had a release date already set, I would say it has the look of a film that would ordinarily be dumped in an off month like January with little attention.
I had a post saying my feelings, but to avoid adding fuel to the fire, I'll just say I agree with all of this. Fantastic Four doesn't seem like it's getting much attention from Fox, but ostracizing others who do not share your anger is pointless and illogical.
As well as dismissing somebody's opinion as a "hater" if they don't happen to think this movie so far looks good is also pointless and illogical.