MovieChat Forums > 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007) Discussion > The problem with these FF movies is not ...

The problem with these FF movies is not the cast...

posted 15 years ago by Sandoz
19 replies | jump to latest

It's the approach. The films were less like Spider-Man or X-Men, and more like Speed Racer. They took the oldest Marvel Silver-age title of them all and turned into a movie for (and ONLY for) audiences with the emotional and intellectual levels of a 14 year old. Well, guess what? 14 year olds grow up (and some are already mature at that age anyway), and by the time the 2nd film came along, anyone even slightly advanced past the age who would be entertained by the juvenile approach they took with this had already moved on from this one-dimensional tripe.

Reed Richards -- I never once believed this guy could lead a team in combat. They wrote his character as some kind of bumbling, absent-minded professor.

Ben Grimm -- Chiklis was probably the best casting choice they made for this film,but c'mon, is that really the best costume they could manage? The Thing looked like he had some kind of pumpkin/skin disease. Should have used CGI...

Johnny Storm -- yeah, he's supposed to be a hot-shot (pun intended), and thinks he's god's gift to the ladies, but that's all that his character was and he was written like he was a 16 old. Total caricature.

Sue Storm -- Ok, Alba is smokin' hot, and I never grew tired of looking at her, but did they really have to make her into kind of a bitch? When she's not bugging Reed about his "science projects" (in the second film), she's competing with his to prove she can do anything as well as any male (first).

I welcome the reboot, heck, I wouldn't even mind if they keep the same cast--just get somebody in charge who knows what The Fantastic Four is all about, please.

And oh yeah, try and incorporate some of Jack Kirby's design this time, at least for the gizmos, will ya?

Yancy Street out.

[–] Ether101 15 years ago

The problem with this argument is that this movies were done nothing like the Speed Racer movie.

[–] Sandoz 15 years ago

Speed Racer was not the ideal example I could have come up with there, but in terms of a movie that was childish, juvenile, and poorly scripted, FF I+II had more in common with it than it did with most other Marvel Super-Hero films (all the ones from the last dozen years or so anyway).

Way to seize on one minor example from my post and ignore the general point, btw.

[–] Journeyman1 15 years ago

The problem with the movies is that it took two movies to get it right. The Fantastic Four is about a family of superheroes dealing with their super powers while also trying to balance their personal lives. That's exactly what the second movie portrayed. The first movie was so full of sexual innuendos and adult humor it was ridiculous. They don't need to reboot the series. They just need to continue where the second movie left off because they finally got it right.

[–] Diapertime 15 years ago

More CGI never helps a movie, it only hurts.

I actually liked the way the Thing was done, he looked like a human who had been mutated, and thats how the Thing should look, would you rather have had him look like some fake CGI monster? You can't dehumanize the character THAT much.

Like look at The Thing, Mystique, and Beast from X-men 3, Nightcrawler from X-2, then look at the fully CGI characters like GHOST RIDER and the Hulk. Which looks better? The only CGI character that didn't look terrible was Iron Man, and that was only because his armor is metal, and metal characters are the only kind of CGI characters that look decent.

If you saw Invisible Woman, Human Torch, and Mr Fantastic all walking down a street, then a lumbering inhumanly looking, 10 feet tall, CGI version of The Thing stomping around behind them you have to admit it wouldn't fit. Make-up was a better choice, but they could've made it look a bit more organic, i agree, it was a little TOO orange.

HEY BUHHEAD! MAYBE I'M HER NEW BOYFRIEND!
Buzz Bummerman - 3 Ninjas High Noon at Mega Mountain

[–] Sandoz 15 years ago

To address the subject of The Thing (of whom you should always preface with "sir," lest you find yourself on the other side of a wall...)

When I said CGI should have been used for his look, I wasn't arguing that his character should necessarily have been 100% CGI, just that the technology should have been used to augment Chiklis in the suit to make him look more powerful and rocklike. I'm thinking along the lines of how the CGI was used in 300 to make every human in the film look badass and more like a body-builder because, let's face it, without some added CGI non of those actors has those kind of rockhard 6-pack abs in real life.

I never once believed that Chiklis was not a guy wearing a lumpy orange suit. And his look was too soft, too--to me, The Thing in the comics always appeared as though his outer body was comprised of organic material that is close to being rock-like...in the films I think he looks like a mesomorph with pumpkin leprosy.

"I used to call it ADHD, but that took too much time, so I shortened it to ADD..."

[–] Diapertime 15 years ago

Yeah i agree the make up could've been better, but a little CGI never hurts, like i really liked the way Twoface looked in TDK Thats a good use of CGI, not ENVELOPING the character but just little touches made here and there make the character look better.

HEY BUHHEAD! MAYBE I'M HER NEW BOYFRIEND!
Buzz Bummerman - 3 Ninjas High Noon at Mega Mountain

[–] aRealCoolGuy 14 years ago

I agree.. they can continue the series; the only thing really wrong with the movie (other than the juvenile writing) was the characterisation of Dr. Doom... I think they should recast/write Doom and continue the series (although at this point they would have to recast everyone anyway). The last thing I wanna see is another superhero origin film..especially a repeat. What is with these comic book films "rebooting" every time they stumble... the James Bond films never "rebooted" or apologised for the poor films or missed continuity in the series... they just kept rolling and let the fans decide which films they enjoyed the most... if they reboot this, I will not watch it in theaters nor am I planning on seeing the new Spider-Man reboot...

___________________
"You lose money chasing women; never lose women chasing money.."

[–] TheSolarSailor 14 years ago

I agree. I get so tired of everything being rebooted. In the old days, if they made a mistake then the went forward and tried to do better next time. Now, if one single thing goes wrong, auto-reboot. It's ridiculous. James Bond is a great example. Just keep making the series and stop restarting at every turn. and I won't be seeing the new Spiderman either. I saw the new trailer and I am not impressed.

- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?

[–] Prismark10 14 years ago

The films were ok, watchable, nothing too special but overshadowed by the finacial impact of X Men and Spiderman franchises hence the need for a reboot.

I actually find Xmen & Spidermen as really ok and watchable also.

Its that man again!!

[–] megadoomer 15 years ago

I thought the cast and visuals were all fine. The only thing that dragged this movie down was the appalling writing. Of course, if you look back at comics in the '60s the writing was pretty bad, as well, so I guess you could say they were just being authentic.

[–] Sandoz 15 years ago

We're in total agreement, mega... It's the appalling writing, as you put it succinctly, that angered me so much about this film. I know that, hopefully without sounding too condescending, FF is ultimately "just" a comic-book film, but that doesn't mean it had to pander to and skew it's approach to what was a likely target audience age of about 15 y.o.

And yeah, the writing in the original comics by Lee would never threaten Shakespeare in a smackdown dramatist contest, but Lee also wrote the original X-Men and Spider-Man stories, and look how well those turned out when adapted for the screen. But it seems the screenwriters who worked on those films seemed to actually possess something that assisted in updating those adaptations for the screen that the scribblers who worked on the FF seemed to be lacking...talent.

"I used to call it ADHD, but that took too much time, so I shortened it to ADD..."

[–] Stylin291 15 years ago

I agree that the Fantastic 4 as an entity was never the epitome of the superhero comic medium.

It's okay, I guess, and I liked it when I was in my pre-teen years, but it's a weaker story/concept than Stan Lee's other work(s)... Except for Reed Richards. He's totally bad-ass in the Marvel Universe.

That being said, these movies are a MESS! They're horrible; From the casting, to the story, to the lack-of-canon (Silver Surfer loses powers without board, Galactus is a dirt cloud), to the lame effects (Reed's street clothes stretch with him), and Thing's makeup. Awful.

Bad bad bad bad bad. I really think these films are an embarrassment to the genre.

[–] David_Blue 14 years ago

I think your basic point was valid.

I was fine with the Fantastic Four movies being written for young teenagers, but they should have been written for smart young teenagers. Especially young boys who would want Mister Fantastic get over his nerdishness and get masterful more convincingly, would want Ben Grimm to be test pilot smart when he knocked off the grumpy act (which he was, so that was good) and would want the Invisible girl to be nicer.

Don't give a number like the hotness of the sun and get it pointlessly wrong. Don't have retarded chemistry 101 jokes - if you must be specific, think of a bright young nerd and get it right for him or her.

Don't dumb anything down, you're making this movie for young people, not stupid people. They may be interested in different things than adults, but their brains work faster-than-that.

[–] Cinema_Lover 14 years ago

Eh, I didn't mind these movies.

By no means are they anywhere near the top of the line superhero films but I'm OK with that because I was never a big FF fan anyway. I always thought the FF movies seemed more for 9 or 10 year olds then 14. I would think 14 year olds would be too cool to publicly be seen watching stuff like this.

I was in my 20s when the first one came out (old enough to go into a theater and watch a movie like this and not worry what anyone else thinks) and I thought it was OK for what it was. The FF films are clearly family oriented, and whatever, let them do it. If they ever treated Spider-Man, X-Men, Hulk or Iron Man like this, then I'd be seriously pissed. Since I've never had much invested in the FF, I really don't care about the childish nature of it all. I've always thought the FF to be one of the campier and all around sillier/boring superhero concepts, so I'm totally OK with them approaching the material like this. I was decently entertained by the FF movies, they both get 2 stars out of 4 from me. The only thing I kinda get is having such a serious character such as the Silver Surfer in a movie is childish as this, but again, whatever. It's the FF, not Batman or Spider-Man.

[–] classOFfitness 14 years ago

well the first movie was 'PG-13', and that why some poeples see the second movie as being silly. cause they went for a 'PG' rating with silver surfer?

[–] Studly135 13 years ago

Never read any Marvel Comics but I've seen every Marvel film and I'll tell you from a movie standpoint, the directing was poor, 3/4 of the cast were poor choices, and the characters created were all stereotypical and flat. These movies are on par With GL. Could have been so much better.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jpowers4667 13 years ago

These movies are absolutely terrible. A remake with a new cast (especially considering one of them is now Captain America), and DEFINITELY a new director with some new writers is absolutely necessary if we even want to talk about a FF film being decent.

Even with the lousy writing/directing, there are problems in the cast. Let me start with Jessica Alba...she is god-awful. Sure, she's great eye-candy, but her appeal ends there. And the actors who play The Thing and Mr Fantastic are terrible here as well. It's basically horrible TV acting at its finest.

And the production values look and feel cheap. It's basically like watching a made-for-TV film.

Starting from scratch is the only way to save this franchise.

[–] bradford-1 12 years ago

Jeez, the grumpiness and jadedness of most of the posters makes me think I saw two different movies! I grew up subscribing to FF comics (1965-1971) and lived through the godawful animated episodes (which DID portray Galactus as he appeared in the books). I found both FF flicks to be exciting, humorous and sort of a throwback to old-time adventure films. Jessica Alba was not my first choice for Sue Storm, (Alicia Silverstone would be my cup of tea) but I can live with her. Has anyone ever seen that cheap-ass, dark, grimy 1994 movie? If you haven't don't putdown the 21st Century versions.
"May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?