In the interest of full disclosure, I will state what most of you already know: I wrote the novelization of “Fantastic Four.” So obviously it’s to my benefit for the film to do well. Anyone who feels that linkage to the film colors my opinion can disregard it as he or she sees fit.
Now–
Just came back from the FF screening in the city. I heard a number of adults crabbing about how terrible it was, and I was left wondering whether they saw the same film I did. I then asked every kid I could find who was in attendance what they thought of it, and kids of (literally) all ages loved it. Girls liked Sue Storm, boys grooved on the Thing and, particularly, the Human Torch. No one loved Reed. But, hey, what else is new?
Whatever you’re expecting in terms of the more mature angle that comic book films have taken, be it “Batman Begins,” “Sin City,” or even the sophistication of X2…to enjoy “Fantastic Four,” you simply have to set the wayback machine in your mind back to when comic books (and movies thereof) were mostly cornball fun. Think “Superman” but without the camp. Some mild spoilers follow:
It’s a well-made film with some wince-worthy dialogue that you then realize could have (and possibly did) come straight out of Silver Age FF, and a lot of sequences that just nail the entire squabbling-yet-loving family nature of the FF. The film is at its best when it keeps it small. The character interactions, the throwaway casual uses of their powers. Johnny’s tormenting of Ben, including a hilarious practical joke while the Thing is sleeping. And you sit there and say, “That’s the FF.”
When it goes big, there are stumbles. The main problem centers on Doctor Doom. My concern was not that they changed Victor Von Doom from a Latverian monarch to a corporate douche bag. My concern is that Von Doom blames Reed Richards for the accident that essentially ruined Von Doom’s life. In the comic book, this blame is misplaced. In the film, it’s not. That Von Doom goes bonkers as a result doesn’t change the fact that Reed really IS responsible. I’ll grant you, that’s consistent with the comic in that Ben blames Reed for rushing them into space without the proper shielding in place. But the thrust of the comic isn’t Ben trying to kill Reed as a consequence. In this case, the FF isn’t battling a supervillain so much as they are doing damage control, cleaning up after the mess the themselves made (or at least that Reed made).
But there’s more than enough in the film to make it worthwhile nevertheless. The Thing should defnitely be seen on a big screen, because all the cries of “Foam rubber” were misplaced. Between the acting, the sound effects, and a few CGI boosts, you’ll believe a man can be made out of rock. And the must-see of the film remains the Human Torch. Basically he’s an exuberant jáçkášš, but hey, again, that’s Johnny. That he’s not callow doesn’t bother me. After all, he grew up and married a Skrull in the comics, so why not just start with him as the older model? Instead of being a teen and thus expected to be a jerk, he’s a guy who refuses to grow up. Johnny Storm with the ultimate in Peter Pan syndrome considering he really DOES learn to fly.
Several key scenes were in the script but not in the film, which would have topped two hours had they been there. These include an entire sequence with Ben attending a soiree at Alicia’s art gallery, and Johnny running afoul of a football star and his date at a singles bar. I’ll be interested to see if they show up back in the eventual DVD release, as they were excellent scenes (although admittedly they didn’t advance the plot much.)
Bottom line, go in expecting a hip, up-to-date rethinking and redefining of the FF, and you’re largely going to be disappointed. Expect a reasonably faithful (Von Doom issues aside) translation of the style, spirit and stories of the Silver Age of comics, and you’ll have a great time.
PAD
• 
GREAT! Now I can’t wait to go see this film on Saturday!
Hmmm…since I’m one of those oddballs that doesn’t mind if a movie is just “fun,” I’ll try and get to it if the car co-operates.
– Chris
That’s exactly what I want the FF movie to be!
Sounds like Dr. Doom didn’t make it through the Hollywood blender in one piece, but you can’t have everything.
FF shouldn’t be X-Men or Batman. I don’t understand fans thinking it should.
The FF has always been bigger, broader, and out there.
I want a fun FF movie with the same passion I wanted a serious Batman movie.
My two kids, 7 & 11, can’t wait to see it.
We’ll be there this morning.
Eh.
I screened it a couple hours ago. It was fun, yes, but I’d put it in the “guilty pleasure” category. The cheese is laid on thick, so that might turn a lot of people off.
My problem with it though, is how unambitious it is. Yeah, they captured the family dynamic of the FF, but not the sense of adventure you always have in the comic. Maybe I’ve been spoiled by Waid’s recent “Imaginauts” run, but that’s as essential to the FF, in my opinion, as all the family bickering.
No grand adventure in this movie though. Just generic action scenes in New York. Doom’s turned into a generic metal villain that shoots lighting bolts. Yawn.
I liked the cast though. They made the cheese work. I could see them in a much better movie, one that didn’t think so small.
All that said, at least it’s good enough for kids. I’ll be taking my six year old to watch it this weekend, probably.
(oh, and while The Thing looks cool, most FX involving Reed look cheeeeeeeeeeeeap)
Ovnio
My daughter is already wanting to see it – she likes Sue Storm (she reminds her of Violet from The Incredibles – guess how many conversations we’ve had about which came first).
I really was hoping that Ioan Gruffudd would manage to do more with Reed – we’re fanatics about the Hornblower TV movies he has done (I’m convinced they paved the way for the success of the Master and Commander movie).
Your review is interesting. Others I’ve seen go the other way: they say the action is fine, but the characterizations of the main four aren’t there. I guess we’ll have to find out for ourselves.
On my way over to see it after I drop the clone off at school. I don’t WANT it to be too serious. Actually, that was really my only gripe with X2, the characterizations were a little darker than usual. Nightcrawler is the clown of the group usually, or at least has a sense of humor. That and I wanted to see more of Colossus.
But I think it’s sad that a movie just can’t be fun anymore without being trashed for being out of touch. Movies are supposed to be FUN by and large. And that’s why my wife isn’t allowed to pick movies anymore. All she ever picks are ones where you come out feeling either INCREDIBLY depressed or guilty for not having gone through what the characters went through. UP WITH FUN!
I haven’t seen the film yet (I plan to this weekend, if a certain minor storm system doesn’t interfere), but I have to take exception with this comment: The Thing should defnitely be seen on a big screen, because all the cries of “Foam rubber” were misplaced. Between the acting, the sound effects, and a few CGI boosts, you’ll believe a man can be made out of rock.
I have seen the Thing on a big screen–the trailers for the film before other movies. Unless the film was *still* undergoing some late post-production work, I haven’t seen anything of it that says anything other than “man in a rubber suit”.
“Mr. Moviephone” didn’t care for it, and his main criticism resonated with me: plot. When I tried to describe what the movie is about after reading the book, the best I could come up with was “origin story”. Not to malign the book, it was a fun read. But it really was all “beginning” with almost no “middle” or “end”.
Anyway, I’ll be seeing it this afternoon.
My wife and I are going to see FF this weekend, but I’m just wondering if I should go by myself.
I figure, most likely, she isn’t going to like it (she doesn’t like Alba or Chiklis anyways), and I’ll really hear about it after the movie.
And this from a woman who really enjoyed Daredevil *sigh*
Any blood (I mean at ALL)? My son wants to see it, but he’ll hit the floor if he sees blood. (Last night he was pitching for his All Star team when a teammate spouted a bloody nose. I told Ben not to look, but he saw enough – then held the image in his head like a pink elephant. Watching him struggle with that, clearly in mental anquish, and still throw strike after strike was great. They must have been strikes since the batters were hitting them all over the park…)
Any bedroom scenes? There’s some smooching, I’m sure, and I’d pay money on a bet that Susan has to strip to be invisible before the suit.
Peter, I’ve always enjoyed your novelizations, many times moreso than the movie itself. But enjoyable reads of “Hulk”, “Batman Forever”, and “Return of the Swamp Thing” (Yes, folks, the book was GOOD!) still had me wondering about the quality of the film.
What I can say is that, I’ve enjoyed the novelization, and every single trailer I’ve seen I can trace directly back to a scene in the novelization.
Tell me Maria Menounos strips out of her pink ski-bunny suit in the film, and I’ll be the first in line tonight. 🙂
David van D.: I’d be surprised if it were more than “origin story”. Astonishing as it may sound, there are a lot of people out there who have never heard of the FF, and need the background (beside the fact that for the movie, the background had to change – the original version of Doom would’ve taken almost half the movie itself!). Assuming there’s an FF2, that’s where you’ll probably see the plots start to work…
Robbnn: It’s stated in the commercials that the way the movie Sue does the invisibility is by using her force field to bend light around her body. This will work no matter what she’s wearing. Yes, I’m disappointed that there won’t be any nekkid Jessica Alba in there too. 🙁
However, Jonathan and Robbnn, both the novel and even some of the teasers, show Jessica Alba stripping down to bra and panties to be fully invisible. And while the teaser shows Reed mentioning the “bending light” it does not show Sue’s very insightful response about… well, other problems associated with invisibility that throw his little theory in the trashcan.
with a disclaimer that i’ve not yet seen the movie, but based on what i’ve seen in the trailers and read online…going in with high expectations:
i don’t mind that they messed with Doom’s origin. A movie is an adaptation of a story. A movie studio has to find that happy medium between keeping comic fans happy, and creating something that’s appealing to the general public as well. whatever their motivation was for changing the origin, that’s fine (within reason, obviously).
Peter – as far as your contention that Doom now has a legitimate reason to blame Reed…that may be true. But so would Ben (we know that in the books, he does), Johnny and Sue. Reed screwed up, plain and simple.
Still, I don’t know that this fact gives Doom any more ‘legitimate reason’ to become a villain. It’d be just as easy for Ben, Johnny, or Sue to flip Reed the bird, and say “screw you…I’m taking advantage of these powers and use them for personal gain regardless of the cost/harm to others.” But they don’t.
It’s still about choices. Life deals us lousy cards sometimes, whether it’s our fault or through absolutely no fault of our own. Arguably, the ‘easy route’ would be to remain bitter, point fingers, assign blame, and become destructive. It’s the hero that, in spite of whether or not he/she “deserved” what happened, rises above it all and further sacrifice themselves in order to do what’s “right” and what benefits the greater good.
Maybe I misunderstood…but if you’re saying that the storyline in the movie justifies Doom becoming a villain…I respectfully disagree.
“Any blood (I mean at ALL)? My son wants to see it, but he’ll hit the floor if he sees blood.”
I’ve been searching my memory and I absolutely cannot remember any blood. The closest one comes to “ick” is that you see a metal shell forming under Von Doom’s skin and a growing scar on his face. But I really don’t remember blood.
And no bedroom scenes. Yes, Sue strips down to basically the equivalent of a two piece bathing suit, but y’don’t see nothin’.
“Maybe I misunderstood…but if you’re saying that the storyline in the movie justifies Doom becoming a villain…I respectfully disagree.”
I’m not saying that it justifies it. What I’m saying is that in the comics, Von Doom has no reason whatsoever to despise Reed. That’s one of the underpinnings of his character: That Von Doom screwed up his own life, but his ego made him so incapable of admitting he’d made a mistake, that he misplaced his anger onto the guy who actually tried to stop him from making the fatal mistake that resulted in his scarred face. That’s part of what makes him such an archly great villain.
In the movie, Von Doom’s actions against Reed–while not justifiable from a moral point of view–are rooted in a reasonable gripe. Reed was the one who put Von Doom in harm’s way. For that matter, we could argue the cosmic rays may have contributed to Von Doom becoming unbalanced, since there’s nothing to suggest he was homicidal earlier. The Doctor Doom who tries to kill the FF and then is trashing NY would never have existed if Reed hadn’t (a) talked Von Doom into going up into the storm and (b) completely miscalculated the speed or intensity of the cosmic storm.
Compare it to, say, Burton’s “Batman.” Yes, the Joker’s creation was a result of Batman dropping him into the chemical vat. But at least Batman was trying to stop him from falling in, and besides, “Jack” was a criminal anyway. And furthermore, the Joker was depicted as having killed Bruce Wayne’s parents. So the balance of “evil,” if you will, remains with the Joker.
Or, dare I say it, consider “The Incredibles.” Yes, Mr. Incredible was responsible for the “creation” of Syndrome. On the other hand, he was genuinely acting in what he believed was Buddy’s best interests by sending him home after the kid nearly got himself killed. The fact that it festered in Buddy and drove him to become a supervillain is his own lookout, especially since–even as an adult–he saw it as a personal rejection and slight rather than an endeavor to keep him safe and out of harm’s way.
So as I said, the FF’s major mission is to combat a villain who wouldn’t have BEEN a villain if not for the set of circumstances that the FF’s leader himself set into motion. It’s damage control.
PAD
I saw the movie in a screening last night too (were we at the same one, I wonder?) and basically agree that the movie is light-hearted fun, but flawed.
I loved Chiklis as Ben Grimm and as the Thing and liked the Human Torch (both the effects and the character) and liked the sniping interaction between the characters. I cared less for Reed and Sue, partially because I seem to become so old and curmeudgeonly to think things like “No way can a person *that* young be such an accomplished scientist/businessperson/genetic researcher, etc.” and partially because I didn’t feel any chemistry between Alba and Gruffudd (or between Alba and McMahon for that matter…)
I do think that Dr. Doom as villain is the weak point of the movie. Not only, as PAD points out, if anything, Doom has a right to be pìššëd at Reed. But additionally, the film proposes multiple bits and pieces of his motivation, but they don’t seem to add up to enough reason for him to do what he does–is he mad at Reed for destroying his company? For stealing his girl? For scarring his face? Does he want to use Reed’s experiments to heal him, or to further empower him? As it comes off (to me, at least) he’s motivated by a bit of all these things, and not enough by any one thing.
Steve Saffel once opined to me that a Fantastic Four movie needs to play on the family aspect of the team–that that’s the defining element of the FF. I suppose the movie gets to a point where it does that pretty well, but I think also part of the appeal of the FF comics is that they’re at the heart of a world filled with adventure–Mole Men and dinosaur islands and alien Skrulls and Negative Zones and Atlantean invaders–this movie doesn’t come anywhere near capturing that aspect of the FF appeal, but then again, it might not be reasonable to expect any movie to be able to do that…
I look forward to see this movie.
I always thought a FF movie should be like the “Back to the Future” trilogy. Fun, light, and way out there, but also *smart* and knowing instead of campy and cringe-inducing, hopefully.
Well, Doom not being a self-made monarch is something I tried to get used to ever since I heard of it, so it probably won’t affect my enjoyment of the movie.
A pity no one liked Reed, PAD. In the original run he wasn’t as interesting as the Thing and the Human Torch, but Reed Richards kinda grew up on me when John Byrne first made the comic closer to a “real” science fiction feel.
Also, much about Reed’s human side hang on his relationship with Doom, Sue, and Ben. Supposedly we can scratch Doom, I want to see how he interacts with Sue and Ben in the movie.
Thanks, Peter.
S’funny, I’ve been reading a graphic novel collecting JB’s run on the FF and while I loved them during the original run, my word, they’re ponderous! Lottsa words, slow plotting. A good editor could have reduced those stories to a few pages…
When I read Ebert’s FF review Thursday, I sensed quite a bit of snobbery in his tone. He ripped the film, but he seemed to be doing so because it wasn’t the dark, “adult” fare he has apparently come to expect from comic book-related films. Personally, I think such an attitude stems from a basic insecurity many long-time SF and comic fans, like Ebert, have about the material they grew up loving. As with the Hulk, they feel such films must be drenched with dark, adult-oriented themes to be “legitimate.” I say horse patootie! I raised just such an issue during a mail interview with Jack Kirby in 1974, and he wholeheartedly agreed that (superhero) comics should be exciting and entertaining first and foremost. It stands to reason then that their celluloid kin should be approached the same way.
I’ll be seeing the FF film tonight, and I hope it is just like a Kirby comic, rather than, say, Ang Lee’s Hulk film.
It was my understanding that Reed didn’t have much choice in Von Doom’s joining the crew; further, it was Von Doom’s space station, and one would assume he was the one who designed the inner chamber shielding, which failed him.
I read the comic adaptation, and was horrified. I didn’t have too much hope that it would even be a cut above the Roger Corman movie (why yes, I do own a copy, and it’s everything you’ve heard…and less).
I think the problems was that I’ve been spoiled by “gritty” comics lately *cough*InfiniteCrisisTie-Ins*cough* and couldn’t enjoy anything Silver Age-y. If I decide to give the flick a shot after all, I’ll try to keep it light.
Better than expected but I really didn’t expect much.
And it could have been SO GOOD. The should have had PAD do the screenplay and Michael France & Mark Frost do the novelization. Tim Story seems like a nice guy in interviews but he brings the same visual flair to this that he showed in TAXI and BARBERSHOP. Doing a comic book movie takes a certain style. Singer has it, Nolan has it, Raimi has it coming out of his ears. Singer, not so much.
I understand that the story of Doom would take too long to tell…then again, I’ll bet that Raimi could have shot a 2 minute montage that would have covered all the bases (I love how every Evil Dead sequel gives you the previous movie in the first 5 minutes or so). This is DR freaking DOOM we are talking about here. THE Marvel super villan. It’s not like they mucked with the origin of Stilt Man.
And yet, conversely, I kinda wish they had mucked around a bit with the costume. Without Jack Kirby swirling it up what you have is a guy in armour with a green cape. Maybe if they always had him standing on air vents or in front of the Fans Are Us shop, but as it was it just sort of drooped and looked sad.
The Thing and Torch, as everyone has noted, stole the show. If FF doesn’t do well how about having Torch show up in the next Spidey movie and I’ll bet a Hulk vs Thing movie could rescue both franchises.
Compare how Mr Fantastic is used to Elastic Girl in the Incredbles and it’s obvious which movie had the talent. Mr Fantastic could have been awesome–again, hire PAD and the artist of his choice, give them a room for a day with pizza and beverages and then just film the fight scene they come up with.
But one cool thing came out of this–THING HANDS!! Just as cool as the HULK HANDS! Now you and a buddy can re-enact your favorite issue of Marvel 2 in 1, smashing away at each other! They even have Thing Feet–get your local cryptozoologist all excited by stomping around in the mud!
But the dolls blow. The Thing looks ok, the Torch looks like Melted Candy Apple Man, the Invisble Girl…well, if I were the toymaker, I’d just sell and empty box, but that’s me. And Reed? Christ, it’s awful! He has two long hands reaching out to you in silent supplication as if begging you to turn the box around to hide his shame. He doesn’t look at all like a superhero, maybe the world’s most successful waiter but that’s it. Let it sit on a furnace for a fe hours and you have a much better and more accurate action figure (CAUTION-Let it cool first. Ðûmbášš.)
Any blood (I mean at ALL)? My son wants to see it, but he’ll hit the floor if he sees blood.
There goes any chance of him borrowing DVDs from his Uncle Bill’s collection…
Bill, I agree about the “action” figures…boy, do they blow. That’s usually not a good sign. That Batman Begins line is really cool, despite 90% of the stuff coming out can at best be said to be “inspired by” the film. But the FF stuff? It’s been out for weeks now, and I’ve just started seeing the 8″ invisible woman figures…they do, indeed, stink. All of them look like they were based on Paul Gulacy depictions…the nostrils are HUGE on them all.
You can usually judge how well a movie will do based on what the outside marketing looks like. If McDonalds options the Happy Meal rights, it’s usually a hit. Burger King (as is the case with FF) 50-50…although the Amazon Cash cards is a very good idea. If you’re movie’s is picked up by Taco Bell, KFC, or Hardees, well, welcome to the $5 DVD bin in a few months.
You’ve already addressed the blood question, but can you tell us if it’s appropriate for kids? My six-year-old is a huge superhero fan, desperately wants to go, but I can’t afford to go by myself first to preview it and make sure it’s okay for him. He likes X-Men, but I wouldn’t take him to see BATMAN BEGINS, much as I liked it – the Scarecrow and Evil-Batman faces would be a bit much.
Sorry to put you on the spot. Unfortunately, most movie sites that allegedly report on the kid-safe nature of a movie concentrate on “moral themes” and freak out about cinema violence if someone throws a punch.
Having read the novelation (excellent job, btw), I have serious reservations about the film. I felt they really missed the mark with Doom. Here was what is arguable the greatest villain of all time in the Marvel Universe, and they turn him into a jerk who goes postal because Sue dumped him. It’s not to the very end of the movie that he becomes a villain, and we get no sense of anything really bad happen (other than killing the FF) should he succeed. No secret plan to take over the world, no doomsday device (pun unintended), etc. Also, what I felt was the strength of the novel was Peter’s excellent characterizations of the FF, and am unsure as to how well they will be presented on the big screen.
Other Jon: Sure, but compare it to Batman Begins. That’s also an origin story with a lot of depth to the telling, but BB manages to have a fairly strong plot in addition to the origin story (i.e. two idealistic men with radically different ideas on how to save the world clash in a battle to see whose plan will get to play out).
FF does have a conflict, but the conflict seems to be more about establishing a rivalry than about using one to tell a story. And it just doesn’t spring readily to mind.
I haven’t seen it yet. I will see it, probably late next week.
But, the Fantastic Four is my favorite comic book, bar none. It was the first comic I collected – starting with #260, which I picked up at the local newsstand, then bought a subscription to the magazine starting with #263 – right at the start of the Secret Wars thing, and at the height of Byrne’s run. LOVE it.
So, I will like the movie, period. Whatever I need to do to enjoy it, I will do. You bet I’m prejudiced – rose-colored glasses all the way.
I absolutely cannot remember any blood.
Actually, there was blood. When Sue strained herself containing Doom, blood started trickling out of her nose.
I agree that Ebert’s review was too harsh.
As both a movie freak and FF buff for decades, you could say I’ve been waiting for this movie most of my life. Doctor Doom as portrayed here was not that menacing of a villian. I had no problem with Ben… he looked fine. Just got back a few minutes ago and have not soaked it all in yet.
The best superhero movie of all time is still Spider-Man 2. This one ranks far below…
Peter’s mention of the Incredibles reminds me of my overriding thought about superhero movies in the middle of Dash’s sequence near the end of that film: “MAN do I want to see this bunch do a Flash treatment.”
“S’funny, I’ve been reading a graphic novel collecting JB’s run on the FF and while I loved them during the original run, my word, they’re ponderous! Lottsa words, slow plotting. A good editor could have reduced those stories to a few pages…”
Oh my word! You where actually required to read? How dare John Byrne create a classic superhero series, not equaled since, that actually gave the fans their money’s worth of entertainment! Scoundrel!
Padding, at its fans, need to be “edited”. Ðámņ I’m glad folks like you where not in charge of comics back then and still aren’t…wait. Shìŧ. Well, at least you weren’t back then…
Having read the novelization, I fully intend to see the film and give it a chance. However, there was one thing that didn’t grab me about the story and it’s certainly no fault of PAD’s, but more of the script itself; Maybe it translates differently in the film, but I didn’t get any real sense of “Dire peril” from Doom. Yes, he attempts to destroy the FF in his quest for personal power, but I felt that there was something missing… No huge, diabolical act of super villany to raise the stakes like we as comic readers have become accustomed to. Granted, in an origin story we can’t really see something on the sale of launching buildings into space, but since that’s what we’ve come to expect from the likes of Doom, his movie counterpart doesn’t quite come off as the world-threatening menace we expect him to be.
Still, as long as it’s a fun ride, I won’t think too hard on it.
Saw it with my kids this morning.
We, And the audience, loved it. It’s nice to hear people laugh when their supposed to at a comic book movie. And applauded when it’s over.
Reed, Ben, Johnny, and Sue were all there.
As far as them missing the “Imaginauts” aspect, That was the whole beginning of the film.
You don’t have time for a trip to the microverse or negative zone AND have time to show them developing their powers. Save that for the sequel.
And if the audience was any indication at my suburban theater, than there will be one.
Yeah, okay, my bad. On the blood thing, I totally forgot that at the very end of the film, Sue is concentrating so hard on her forcefield that two, maybe three small drops of blood trickle from her nose. I was picturing violent sequences, like Johnny getting punched or Von Doom throwing people around, and trying to remember if they bled. Clean overlooked Sue’s very minor nosebleed. I hope that doesn’t send the young viewer in question into shock or anything.
That said, I saw kids four, five and six years of age coming out of the screening last night looking perfectly happy and talking excitedly about wanting to buy the toys. So I think taking a six year old is simply not a problem.
PAD
I’m going to see it sometime soon. I have modest expectations, and it sounds like it might be fun. “Superman” without the camp should be very much to my taste. Besides, I’ve never been that big a fan of the comic – I love the Lee and Kirby stories circa the mid-late 1960s, I love the handful of stories by Wolfman and Byrne, I think Simonson’s run is as underrated as Byrne’s solo run is overrated. I don’t know what this Imaginauts thing that people are talking about is, because up until a few months ago, I had been away from comics for several years. Could someone please tell me? If Mark Waid was involved, I’d be interested, I’m a fan of his writing.
“S’funny, I’ve been reading a graphic novel collecting JB’s run on the FF and while I loved them during the original run, my word, they’re ponderous! Lottsa words, slow plotting. A good editor could have reduced those stories to a few pages…”
I’m among those fans who think Byrne in the FF was pure perfection, but I see what you mean. Whenever I go read a comic from another decade, I must go through a period of re-adaptation.
I felt the same when I re-read Byrne’s Man of Steel. Lotsa captions, thought baloons, and expository dialogue. I’ve been spoiled by the more cinematic style from current comics.
And the most funny thing is, from the 80’s writers, Byrne was one of the more economic in his words. It was simply a different time. Compared to Claremont, or Englehart, or deMatteis, or deFalco, or Thomas, JB was a mime.
The reason for this style, of course, was because the comics where written so they could be enjoyed by very young readers…as well as older readers mature enough to accept this very altruistic set up.
It’s interesting that many of the fans in the letter pages back then, the older ones, seemed to accept this as appropriate for the genre without question, and simply accepted the comics for what they where. I also find that many of those fans where more insightful, intelligent, and complex than many of today’s older fans like to think of themselves as being.
“The reason for this style, of course, was because the comics where written so they could be enjoyed by very young readers…as well as older readers mature enough to accept this very altruistic set up.
It’s interesting that many of the fans in the letter pages back then, the older ones, seemed to accept this as appropriate for the genre without question, and simply accepted the comics for what they where. I also find that many of those fans where more insightful, intelligent, and complex than many of today’s older fans like to think of themselves as being.”
I think I agree with you, my friend.
While this dialogue style isn’t realistic, it did a good job of making the story always easy to follow, not only for younger readers, but also for occasional readers.
Captions and thought balloons used to always establish where the characters were, and what they were feeling, and what it was all about, and who was who and what was what.
Hmmm… and the only point I disagree with the poster who started this discussion, is that the “old” style seemed to result in stories and sagas being shorter, instead of longer.
Nowadays, if you want to transmit an idea to the reader, you can’t use captions or thought baloons, and even dialogue baloons are more realistic, so you have to “show, not tell” and it usually takes longer to introduce characters and situations.
Not saying that one style is “better” than the other, though.
pete
how do you compare the novel to the finished movie???
Re: Imaginauts.
Well, basically, Waid’s run approached the FF more as scientists than typical superheroes, which is exactly what I think the movie should have done. No, you don’t need a trip to the Negative Zone or whatever, but you need to give us a sense of adventure, something to set the team apart from any other superhero teams. The plot of the movie is reduced to them trying to get rid of their powers and them trying to stop Doom’s rampage in New York. Unimpressive, to say the least.
I say, screw the origin setup. Like I read somewhere else, this is a movie where they could have benefitted from hitting the ground running, like in The Incredibles, giving us the team at their best, and dealing with their origin in flashbacks, if at all. Of course, the movie I’d like the FF to be would have had a much bigger budget and a director with an actual voice. Imagine what someone like Spielberg could do if he wanted to.
As for the movie being appropiate for kids . . . Like I said, I’m taking my six year old (who I wouldn’t take to Batman Begins). Scarier than the blood running from Alba’s nose is Doom’s murder of his physician, but there’s no blood there and it’s really not that bad.
And I just read Ebert’s review . . . He might be too harsh, but I agree with him on the fact that the Fantastic Four are underwhelming. And that’s a HUGE flaw.
Ovnio
I COULDN’T TELL IF I WAS WATCHING THE FANTASTIC FOUR OR AN EXTENDED EPISODE OF THIRTYSOMETHING.
LOOK: MILES DRENTELL IS TRYING TO KILL MICHAEL STEADMAN AGAIN. MICHAEL, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO STOP PUNISHING YOURSELF FOR YOUR DEAD FATHER’S BUSINESS FAILURES AND QUIT WORKING FOR SUCCESSFUL EVIL BÃSTÃRÐS OUT TO STEAL YOUR WORK AND KILL YOU?
LOOK: HOPE IS NAGGING MICHAEL ON YET ANOTHER OTHER ISSUE HE’S STONEWALLING. MICHAEL, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE A STAND ON WHETHER THE CHILDREN SHOULD BE RAISED JEWISH OR INVISIBLE?
LOOK: ELIOT’S MARRIAGE IS FALLING APART AGAIN, NOT BECAUSE HE HAS BRIGHT RED HAIR, BUT THIS TIME BECAUSE HE’S MADE OF BRIGHT ORANGE ROCKS.
LOOK: GARY IS ON FIRE. GØÐÐÃMN IT GARY, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO SLOW DOWN ENOUGH FOR MELISSA TO LOVE YOU? BY ALL RIGHTS MELANIE MAYRON’S LOVE BELONGS TO ME.
Good movie.
So when is PAD finally going to get to write the FF in comic book form? not a prequell FF story but the main book… Cuz i’d love to read what he comes up with
1About the blood thing… yes, alba’s nose trickles and there are some violent parts mentioned above… but everyone seems to be missing how Doom takes his SECOND life… the banker feller in the parking garage… .that REALLY bugged some people in the audience I was in. Both times… it’s a pretty good date movie, guys! It’s a rather dark turn for a light hearted movie… I don’t want to do a spoiler but part of teh scene IS in the trailers. Some young’uns who have issues… or parents who think their kids SHOULD have issues with certain things might be bothered. Just a warning.
There is one word to use to describe this movie: FUN. I could deal with the changes to Doom, and I thought that they really nailed the team. And Michael Chiklis IS Ben Grim, the ever-lovin’ blue-eyed Thing. F4 may not have the character/dramatic depth of the X-Men movies, or the pathos of the Spider-Man films, but it is FUN. Highly recommended, and I look foward to owning it.
Oh yea, one other bit, after seeing the “blood” mention. There is once scene where Doom blows a huge hole through a guy’s chest. It’s not terribly graphic, but he does stand there long enough to register the hole before he keels over. So there’s that and the two nosebleeds when Sue strains too hard that parent’s might be concerned about, but not too much.
I’m looking forward to seeing it. I saw the previews when I saw WOTW (I have no idea where the bad reviews for THAT came from) and it looks good. As it stands, that looks like the only other movie I am gonna see this summer. I will just wait for anything else to come out on Netflix. I would have seen it without your review Mr. David, but now I feel better about it.
“how do you compare the novel to the finished movie???”
I would guess that he prefered the novel, seeing as he wrote it. I have a feeling, based on Mr. David’s other novelizations, and his other books, that I will too. He has a way with words and backstory that makes the whole thing even better.
“Superman” without the camp should be very much to my taste.”
WHY DOES EVERYONE COME DOWN SO HARD ON “SUPERMAN??” I liked it. (admittedly, I was ten when I first saw it, but I still liked it.)
Is Reed responsible for Doom? I’m not so sure he entirely is. Partially in that they wouldn’t have been there if not for Reed’s proposal. (Then again, there was the suggestion from Ben that Victor may have sabtogued Reed’s contract with NASA forcing him to go through Doom’s company. If that part is true, then I would say that Reed is even less at fault. However, that’s not my main point.)
Victor was safely behind the shielding when the cosmic rays hit. The shielding failed. Perhaps this is a reverse of the comic version where the FF was exposed, because Reed’s shielding failed (or did he forget to put them in.) Here, Doom’s shields failed to do what they were advertised to do. Doom’s mutations are at least partially his own fault.
Though I do agree that most of the movie is “damage control”, especially the whole bridge scene.
I saw a matinee show of FANTASTIC FOUR at a matinee (benefit of working 2:30-10), and I thought it was a decent movie. [Lots of spoilers follow, but this far down that’s par for the course.] On the plus side, Michael Chiklis was absolutely perfect, both as the human Ben and as the rocky Thing. (I agree with PAD — he looked awesome!) Jessica Alba, while providing an eyeful, was also a strong female character, something pretty lacking in most movies we’ve gotten this summer. Chris Evans had fun with the most fun role (the daredevil and sexual addict for whom the powers are a godsend), and Julian McMahon was perfect as Doom. (Sorry Ioan, but you got stuck playing the stiff, responsible character.)
The movie’s big plus is that they kept the family dynamic of the comic book: Johnny as the fun-loving troublemaker, Ben as the sullen, angry loner, Reed as the mature father/leader, Sue as the mother who’s responsible but not as stiff). Watching them together, argue, make up, and bond worked just fine.
My biggest complaint: not enough action. I know it’s supposed to be an introduction, but there’s the opening scene on the bridge, the showdown at the end, and… that’s it. (Contrast that with THE INCREDIBLES: the opening with the jumper, Mr. Incredible battling the first droid, Elasti-Girl breaking into the base, the kids fending for themselves…) You’d also think someone as influential and powerful as Doom would have some henchmen, or robots (even if not Doombots), instead of just himself and a rocket launcher.
I gotta disagree with PAD about Reed being fully responsible for what happened. Ben pointed out that the storm’s acceleration was a fluke that no one could have anticipated, and when Reed suggested aborting the mission Victor was the one who kept things going. Plus Victor saw everything he had (the business) going down the tubes, exactly when the media was showing Richards and his friends as heroes. It made more sense than the comics’ “You scarred my face, now I will hate you forever” origin.
I also had a few quibbles that make me want to read PAD’s adaption. Why give Alicia drawing tools if she didn’t draw anything? Did Doom have a plan, or was he just going to walk through Manhattan blowing stuff up? Wasn’t it too fast that Reed proposed to someone he hadn’t been involved with for two years? (I love my ex-girlfriend, but we’d have to go on quite a few dates again before I pop the question.) Is Ben going to stay comfortable as the Thing? (The comics had him agonizing over his condition for years.)
I agree with the poster who said the movie toys are fairly weak. The Thing looks great (though who wants to wear Thing feet?), the three Invisible Woman variants (visible, half-invisible, fully invisible) are nice, and the Torch is decent. However, Mr. Fantastic has features not in the movie (hammer hand? buzzsaw hang?), and there’s no Doctor Doom figure!
I suppose it’s progress of a sort that there’s more male skin than female skin. Yes, Jessica Alba shows up once in her underwear (yayyyyy!!!) and gets walked in on in the bathroom. But Chris Evans walks around more in the skin-tight suit, is topless in the snow, and turns up holding a strateggically-placed newspaper as his only article of clothing.
So, who’ll the villain be in the sequel? I could see the Mole Man and his armies, or Diablo. Galactus would be a bit much at this point, and the Reed-Sue wedding makes the Namor love triangle a bit moot (unless he interferes with the wedding plans).
The critics were so harsh! I don’t get it. I suspect that part of the problem lies with the nature of the Fantastic Four itself. In order to make this film more “grown up” they would have had to distance themselves from the comic more than they did. These critics wouldn’t have liked the FF comic either is my guess.
There is one thing that this film did better than any other super-hero movie so far: a real “team battle” at the end. It was wonderful to see Reed directing them against Doom as they used their powers as a team. Hard to pull off, and well done.
I saw FF this evening and I really enjoyed it! The entire theater clapped after it ended, and as we were filing out, I heard a group of pre-teen boys saying stuff like “I’m the Torch,” or “I’m the Thing” — stuff I didn’t think kids that age argued anymore.
In my opinion, the dialogue in this film, more than any other Marvel-influence film to date, is the closest to capturing the snappy patter and spirit of a 1960s Lee-Kirby comic — and that includes either Spider-Man I or II.
My advice to those who have yet to see the film: Approach it like a 1960s FF comic, i.e., don’t try to intellectualize or critically analyze it, just enjoy the ride.
Oh, yeah. As I suspected, Ebert snobbed out when it came to his review of this film. Personally, I give it a solid thumbs up.
Enjoyed the movie. Tightly run, which was good because the plot wasn’t thick enough to support much bloat. Alba was competent and not totally unconvincing. Effects were good.
I think the lack of a strong non-origin plot is why it’s getting all the Reviewer Hate. Only indie films are allowed to be slice of life.