I'm something of a Fantastic Four apologist, but I really can't believe they're doing midnight showings of Fantastic Four: The Rise of the Silver Surfer. I think I'm the only person I know who doesn't consider the original to have been absolutely horrible, and even I think it only achieved mediocrity thanks to my very low expectations going in.
« Huh, Yourself | Main | Prizes for Drugs »
Seriously?
14 Jun 2007 12:34 pm
Comments (37)
C'mon, that movie was horrible. I have always thought the Silver Surfer was one of the cooler comic book characters and I have no doubt that this movie will suck and drag the surfer down with it.
Two words.
Jessica Alba.
I found the first Fantastic Four movie to be ok. Certainly nowhere near the level of the X-Men flicks, but not far behind the latest Superman and Batman movies or the various Spiderman movies which underwhelmed me.
I also had low expectations for the first movie, but I ended up really enjoying it. It's definitely lighter than even the spiderman movies, but it didn't try to be anything but that.
As a huge Shield fan I was sucked into watching the first film cause Michael Chiklis was in it. All I can say is that man should thank the G-ds every day that his brillant show pulled him out of the trite crap he did before (and with Fantastic Four "franchise" is going to do afterwards)
Huge FF fan as a kid, most of my reading was from the John Byrne issues. the movie sucked in so many ways. It was originally planned to be a sitcom type of superhero movie. You can still detect that in the script. The Thing is way too small, ruins the whole effect. If you can't do the characters right don't do the movie.
It made plenty of money, though. I don't remember specific rankings or dollar amounts, but what reviewers said is beside the point for the people who decide whether midnight showings are worth it.
I'd say I agree with you about the first Fantastic Four movie. I found it fun and better than conventional wisdom said, but did not go into it with high expectations either. Also, it can't have helped that "Batman Begins" premiered only about a month before. Tough act to follow and all that.
I'm looking forward to it because of how the Marvel Ultimate universe handled Galactus, by making him into an actual world-eating monstrous threat rather than the "generic cosmic humanoid with an addiction" he's normally shown as. I don't know how they're handling him/it in the movie, but that's one area I do have high expectations for... uh oh.
I'm with you - I thought FF was one of the better Marvel movies, second to the X-Men series, maybe. The characterizations were good, especially Ben Grimm. You could see the original comic frames in the composition - for instance, when Ben stops the truck in the bridge with his shoulder.
And as for Surfie, Mr. Sullivan above puts it best. The ultimate badass would HAVE to be: "a naked silver guy who surfs... IN SPACE"
Huh. I routinely defend the first Fantastic Four movie amongst my friends. It's not a great movie, but as far as summer blockbuster popcorn action movies go, it's pretty good. And as far as movies based on comic book superhero properties go, it's probably in the top 10 (okay, the bottom half of the top 10, possibly number 10 itself, but in the top 10).
And, if you haven't figured it out yet, midnight showings are all about the hype. You set up a midnight showing to make people think "oh, this must be exciting since they're putting it out at a midnight showing". The actual merit of the film being debuted at a midnight showing is completely irrelevant to the amount of hype you might be able to generate by showing it at midnight. Heck, a lousy film might look better at midnight when you've been out drinking for a bit and you're feeling kinda sleepy...
Didn't see the first FF movie, but I understand Reed and Sue get married in this one. Can I expect any of the obvious jokes?
I liked FF1. In fact, it might be my favorite comic book movie. I'm not a comic book geek, though, so my standards are pretty plebian.
Not horrible at all. It aimed lower that the X-Men or Spider-Man series or Batman Begins or Superman Returns or Hulk or Sin City. Not all of those hit the heights hey aimed for, of course. FF basically did, or it hit close. That made it better than high-aspiration failures like X3 or Hulk (to say nothing of low-aspiration failures like Catwoman or Elektra). Genuinely fun; looking forward to the new one.
I really can't believe the words I'm reading here. FF was probably the worst comic book movie I've seen since Superman 4. Just shockingly bad.
I couldn't believe how bad Ioan Gruffud was, given his wonderful performances in the Horatio Hornblower series, etc. And, I mean, Jessica Alba = pretty but really, really bad. The bad guy was pretty good, but I think there's a strong tendency to over-focus on the bad guy in comic book movies. Sure, it was technically well done (what isn't these days?), but it could not have been written much worse. There wasn't a single moment of suspense or real impact for me. I was bored.
I had low expectations going in, and it failed to meet them.
Having only partially paid attention while watching the first movie, might I inquire as to why it made any sense, in context, for Sue to disrobe on the bridge?
I liked Chiklis as Ben Grimm in FF1...I always had a soft spot for that character (gee, who'd'a known that I identify with freaks and outsiders?), and I thought that the portrayal had some emotional depth--which hadda be one *bitch* of an acting job, under the 6" of latex.
The rest? Eh. I'm old enuff to remember Johnny Storm as a blonde 50's rebel, so the crewcut biker-boy version left me cold. I barely noticed Ioan. But Jessica will always be Jessica, and that ain't half bad.
FF is, sadly, poorly cast. Worse, the first movie didn't make use of Jack Kirby panels as storyboards. The great virtue of the Spider-Man movies is the onging homage to Steve Ditko and his successors. Here's hoping the new movie will at least acknowledge the wonderful art of the original Silver Surfer/Galactus/Dr. Doom issues.
'might I inquire as to why it made any sense, in context, for Sue to disrobe on the bridge?
'
1. Was originally meant to be a sitcom superhero movie.
2. Jessica Alba can't act.
The one good part of the movie had more to do with science than plot. When the Thing was holding the fire truck you could see him slipping on the pavement. Just because he's physically strong enough to lift the truck doesn't mean the weight of the truck isn't great enough to pull him off the bridge if he loses traction.
What if I said to you "FROM THE DIRECTOR OF TAXI STARRING JIMMY FALLON"? Now try staying away!
Most bad superhero movies are still fun to watch. FF committed the worse sin a movie can make; it was boring. And his coming from a Jessica Alba defender (though I don't like her as a blond.)
1. Was originally meant to be a sitcom superhero movie.
2. Jessica Alba can't act.
I did specify "in context", didn't I? Obviously the meta-reason was to satisfy my prurient interest in Jessica Alba's shapely curves, a goal with which I have no objection, I hasten to add.
Why did she have to disrobe? Simple, because you would have been able to see her clothes when she went invisible. Not that hard to figure out, even if the science is complete bunk...
'I did specify "in context", didn't I?'
Yes. See answer number 1. There is no context in teh finished product. Who knows what was originally planned. The more I think about it the dumber that scene gets. She goes invisible so she can get past the crowd. How did the Reed and Johnny pass? They were with her when she put her clothes back on. Maybe she has teh same agent as Tom Cruise. He seems to have lots of out of context scenes in movies. I think directors are contractually obligated to give him solo scenes regardless of context. The dumb ass peanut butter sandwich scene from War of the Worlds comes to mind.
FF was probably the worst comic book movie I've seen since Superman 4.
worse than:
Batman and Robin?
Catwoman?
Elektra?
the original Punisher?
Catwoman?
Hulk?
Catwoman?
Steel?
Constantine?
LXG?
are you kidding?
I'd say it was better than X3 or Daredevil, but I could see argument in either case. But, c'mon-- worse than Elektra?
JTL makes some good points. Batman and Robin may be the worst movie of all time. That movie was so bad it ended the careers of nearly every castmember. OK, George Clooney got away with it and Uma had her career resurected by Quentin Tarrintino, but still . . .
No, F4 wasn't THAT bad. There are a lot of bad comic book movies out there. Anyone remember Captain America? There are just so many. Still, it was bad. Unbelievably bad. The essential problem I had with it (aside from how boring and inconsequential the plot was) was that you could really see the writers straining to com up with a scenario that would require the bizarre powers of all four "heros". "OK, and why do they need stretchy guy in this scene?" I really can't believe they made a second one.
PS: I actually liked Constantine.
Constantine would seem to be a comic book movie in the same way that Ghost World was a comic book movie, which is to say not really.
Jacob: you went to see Elektra?
*sigh*
Poor Galactus.
He deserved better.
I seem to remember from my comic book reading youth, that Mr. Fantastic was considered the most intelligent human in the Marvel universe. The writers started making that his real superpower.
I saw Batman Forever. Because of that experience, to me there is no Batman movie between Batman Forever and Batman Begins.
Wasn't there a FF movie from the early 90's?
'FF was probably the worst comic book movie I've seen since Superman 4.'
I forgot there was a Superman 4. Was Howard the Duck before or after Superman 4?
Jacob: What no Ghostrider? Blade 3?
Ok, I avoided both as well.
F4 just was. I mean it seemed like a Micheal Bay movie, no poitn just movement between set pieces. The problem of course is that once you put superpowers in you need to do more because the inherent risk has been lessened.
Jacob: you went to see Elektra?
Jacob: What no Ghostrider? Blade 3?
I rented Elektra, sad to say. And I watched more of it than I did of Hulk.
But I haven't seen either of the other two, so didn't want to include them on the list. I think I saw ten minutes of Blade 3 on cable at some point. I suspect they're both very bad, but don't know for sure.
I went to see LXG in the theater. I paid full price for that one, and still resent it...
Constantine would seem to be a comic book movie in the same way that Ghost World was a comic book movie, which is to say not really.
I dunno. Constantine doesn't wear a costume, but he was a DC in-continuity character and goes out and fights the forces of evil and so on. It's probably classified in the same genres at the video store as super-hero movies (action/adventure or fantasy-SF). I'd say Constantine qualifies as much as Blade does. Ghost World, like Road to Perdition or From Hell, is a whole different sort of creature.
I thought the FF movie had one great, signal virtue; it was well edited. One moment they say, 'We're going up to Viktor's private space station!' and I was terrified that we were in for a ten minute 'We're going up to SPACE!' montage. Nope, 15 seconds later their Space Shuttle-a-like was docking.
After that relief, the entire movie was a pleasant bit of fluff to enjoy. They got the super fights mostly not quite right, but almost nobody does (I can count on two hands the number of good super fights (not movies with good super fights, but individual good super fights) in the last ten years of cinema. It only takes one hand if you exclude The Incredibles.
Here's what I don't get: what do they mean, "Rise of the Silver Surfer"? He comes down. Y'know, from space.
Buddies and I went and saw it in Austin last night at midnight. It's the worst movie I've ever paid money to see.
Personally, I liked FF1, mostly because they put Michael Chiklis in an actual costume, and didn't try to CG the Thing. Which would have been awful, and was (mostly) what made the Hulk suck so badly.
I am looking forward to seeing FF2, but I will be SORELY disappointed if the Silver Surfer does not at some point say, "Have you seen this boy?"
But then, I'm also completely stoked for the opening of Live Free or Die Hard, so what do I know?
they... didn't try to CG the Thing. Which would have been awful, and was (mostly) what made the Hulk suck so badly.
The CG in Hulk isn't even among the top ten things wrong with that movie.
Comments closed June 28, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
I thought Fantastic Four was kind of okay. Not offensively bad, at least. But I'm psyched by FF2, if only because I have a sneaking admiration for the kind of 1960's-70's insanity that makes you say, "Okay, we're going to make our Superman -- our ultimately badass hero who none of the other ones can compare to. And he's going to be a naked silver guy who surfs... IN SPACE."
Posted by Michael B Sullivan | June 14, 2007 12:42 PM