Well in fairness, I also get all my news from Trank's stoned tweets. Breaking news tonight--apparently nachos are ****ing great.Well that's straight up wrong, but what reports are you talking about besides Josh Trank's stoned tweets?
Josh Trank tweeted this today
" A year ago I had a fantastic version of this. And it would receive great reviews. You'll probably never see it. That's reality though"
https://twitter.com/joshuatrank
Well that's straight up wrong, but what reports are you talking about besides Josh Trank's stoned tweets?
Google it.
I love the idea of a sixties FF. Then they get lost in space and the Guardians find them.
No one wants to see Ben get his rocks offAs long as the 60's Thing wears pants, I'm ok with that idea.
There's only 2 settings though:and then told Uwe Boll to go full ****** on it.
Fox can go squat on a cactus.
And Trank? Have fun flippin' those burgers, dood.
(Katsuhiro Otomo called--he wants his royalties. )
What was it Max Landis tweeted? Oh yeah: "Karma"
____
You would think from the reviews that Josh Trank's FANTASTIC FOUR would be an AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2-level atrocity.
That certainly isn't my opinion.
Fans bitched and hated on the 2005 version and it's sequel for being too cheesy. To me, they were pretty faithful, tonally, to the jokey/family-oriented stories originally told by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby in the early 60's. If that first film was released today, exactly as is, by Marvel Studios as part of their ongoing cinematic universe, fans would eat it it up (though it may need a different Johnny Storm.)
This new version takes only the basic concept of those iconic characters and reimagines them in a story that asks how real people would react to experiencing such an incredible and traumatic event. More than anything, it's a 50's style horror flick, in the vein of the sci-fi/monster movies that inspired Stan Lee to write comics in the first place. There are scenes that are genuinely frightening and go further than anything I've seen in a Marvel-based film since BLADE.
Now a serious, horrific tone doesn't make for a great movie, but it does make it an interesting one. On the other hand, the pacing of the film seems off, and gets less interesting by the second act. The uneven structure doesn't do any favors to characters like Ben Grimm and Susan Storm, who are underdeveloped and not given much to do. As Grimm, Billy Elliot doesn't have a fraction of the charisma of Michael Chiklis, and looks too tiny to be taken seriously. And as The Thing, his voice is so over-modulated, anyone could have mo-capped the entirely CG monster.
Once again, Dr. Doom is the character in name only, but Toby Kebell has genuine presence and functions well within the story they're trying to tell.
If you're a fan of the comics, treat this as a standalone, Elseworlds take on the characters. If you just want to see an interesting sci-fi flick, forget the critics and go in with an open mind.
At the end of the day, the all-new FANTASTIC FOUR isn't perfect, but with a director's cut to flesh things out, there's a pretty good movie in there.
I love the idea of a sixties FF.
The show was awesome, the childhood part with Reed and Ben was perfect, then as they got rolling, this seemed like a really good Sci Fi flick, I basically forgot I was watching a FF movie, but then.... wow, it's like they seriously took a pretty fun ****ing first half of a flick and then told Uwe Boll to go full ****** on it.
Damn shame too, because I was thinking this is the beginning of something great. All that build up for that last part of a B movie second half?
I agree, the movie had so much potential, but halfway in it takes a turn for the worst. The editing was horrible and that third acts was abysmal.
I actually hope Marvel gets the rights back because of how poorly Fox messed up this movie. I'm honestly interested in a Trank's cut.
Enter your email address to join: