Sunday, July 5, 2015

Some Thing Ain't Right Here....


Karen: I'm presenting this without comment, because I'm sure you'll all know exactly what to say about it...


21 comments:

Rip Jagger said...

The Thing has NO pants!!!!!

(And apparently no...ahem... "thing" either -- Yikes!)

Rip Off :)

david_b said...

Oh my... THAT'S a 'morning after' pill (or 'mourning after', my typical pun..).

I'm ignoring this entire ramp-up. Entirely. I'm just writing it off. The trailers look ho-hum.., more of the same Gruffudd/Alba/Evans/Chiklis trappings from a few years back. Now just a younger (and interracial) pandering go at it..?

Ben looks like some left-over from the GOTG outtakes. I really liked Ioan Gruffudd from that previous franchise, but it should have went the retro route they presented Captain America in.

I'm just not getting a good feel from this but then again, it's for the newer generation with far more disposable income than I'll ever have again, so have at it.

Humanbelly said...

So wait, is this from, like, a PREMIERE MAGAZINE or ROLLING STONE article or something? It's not just a straightforward print ad, is it? I hope--? 'Cause NO studio would ever use copy that inanely cliched on their own product. Not to mention snarky and rather pointedly dismissive of any older FF fans out there. Granted, it's dismissive of the previous films in particular, BUT-- it almost directly states that the problems with the films were that they didn't jettison any of the stodgy "maturity" of the source material.

Or am I reading too far between the minimal lines?

This is actually the worst promo I've seen for the film so far-- it makes me care about it even less, which was a MoleMan-level low bar already. . .

When vague (and, truly, played-out) buzzwords like "cooler" and "edgier" are being emblazoned across the pre-release hype headline, it strongly suggests to me that the film's publicity campaign has fallen down into the hands of third or fourth tier staff associates. There would seem to be no illusion about the quality of this goober. Geeze, Josh Trank's "quest"-- of all the eye-rolling, pretentious B-S. . . .

HB





















Ozone said...

The Thing. Wait, what? And THAT'S Reed Richards? Oh my. The entire project is so poorly conceived it defies description. Once again the Hollywood brain trust thinks they can do it better; once again we'll watch them fail. And Empire's cover copy is just horrendous. You can't polish this turd, Empire.

J.A. Morris said...

Is the nude thing a reference to the movie 'Mallrats'?

Martinex1 said...

What the?... I cannot believe... they left off... Reed's grey temples!

Seriously, what is it with the "youth-a-nizing" of characters. Doesn't Hollywood remember an older adventurous professor named Indiana Jones? Or the heroic, aged, threesome battling the shark in Jaws? Or James Bond? Surely the kids won't see those movies.

As for the Thing, I am speechless (but I can still type). He should be called No-Thing. I blame it on the CGI and design. He is too top heavy. They made him overly bulky and shoulder wide; this caused a problem with the appearance of his legs being undersized. Put pants on him and that emphasizes the off balance nature. Take his pants off, avoid an R, and this what you get ( or don't get). They had to put their own twist on it and screwed it up.

Positives: Miles Teller is a really good actor. I saw "Whiplash" and despite the brutal nature of the film I was spellbound by all of the acting. Invisible Woman's (or is it Girl) powers look displayed well. I haven't really seen Johnny flame on yet, so looking for that.

Here's hoping Doom is a middle aged, crabby neighbor, that just doesn't like these 4 kids on his lawn!

Sad thing is I will still probably see it, like it, buy my son the Happy Meal and steal the toy.

Edo Bosnar said...

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaannnd, it looks like there's another FF film coming out that I'm completely uninterested in seeing (although if Doom were, as per Martinex, a crabby neighbor shaking his fist at those pesky kids, I'd be on board - but isn't Doom supposed to be a hacker or something?)

Humanbelly said...

Actually, the previews strongly suggest that Doom may somehow be replacing Anihilus as the ruler of the Negative Zone.

HB

Dr. Oyola said...

Looks like it is based in Ultimate FF.

The tagline is horrible, but the people who come up w/ tag lines don't make movie.

The way I look at it either:

1) It will somehow surprisingly end up good.

2) It will be so bad that Fox will decide to make some deal with Marvel like Sony did re: Spider-Man to save their loses.

3) It will do bad enough that no one will see it, but not so bad that Fox won't recoup their loses overseas (which is where most money on movies is made these days).

As for Thing's thing. I imagine it looking like this (but all orange).

I PROMISE that link is safe for work and family.

Doug said...

You know, David brought up the FF flicks from the previous decade. Funny, but it may not be long until we look at those through new lenses and discuss how much those films got right, hmmm?

I've never been a complete basher of those two movies. They don't rank near the top 10 of Marvel films as far as I'm concerned, but they were better than, say, Spider-Man 3 (and I prefer the Tobey Maguire Spidey movies). I thought that visually (look + special effects) the Silver Surfer was great. Doom - trainwreck. Think about it -- they can tweak a character like Arnim Zola and he comes off perfectly, but they can't get Marvel's greatest baddie right on film? Yeah, yeah, Marvel Studios and all that.

I'd be really curious to know how the CGI guys would explain the appendage-absence on poor Ben. On second thought...

Doug

The Prowler said...

It's almost like when you realized there wasn't really a Santa Claus or your girlfriend had an Adam's apple or your Mom had been using ground turkey for a long time, a REALLY long time or they stopped making Betamax movies........ There's an old saying where I come from: Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then. I guess there is an exception to every rule.

Would it have made a difference if they had used "new" and "improved" or "now more concentrated"? I blame Marvel discontinuing their Giant Size line for the mess we're in today.............yeah, I said it!!!!

(I know you don't get a chance to take a break this often
I know your life is speeding and it isn't stopping
Here take my shirt and just go ahead and wipe up all the
Sweat, sweat, sweat)

Arion said...

I can't say I'm a fan of the new FF version.

By the way, I just read your post about Barry Windsor-Smith and it was great. You seem to be a bit of an expert. Anyway, I wrote about Weapon X in my blog (wich I encourage you to visit):

www.artbyarion.blogspot.com

I hope you enjoy my review, and please feel free to leave me a comment over there or add yourself as a follower (or both), and I promise I'll reciprocate.

Cheers,

Arion.

Anonymous said...

Doug - I reckon those earlier FF films go to show that - Galactus notwithstanding - a film can stick with the source material closely but still miss the spirit.
I don't have a problem with changing stuff around for an adaptation, especially when the source material is decades old.... although I agree, this new FF flick doesn't look promising. But who knows til they see it?

-sean

William said...

The Thing looks like Clayface from Batman The Animated Series.

I don't understand why these other studios just can't follow Marvel's example of how to do a superhero comic movie right. I mean, for god's sake, just take out some old FF comics and basically do THAT! (But with actors and CGI instead of drawings). Jeez, how hard could it freaking be???

Karen said...

I really don't want to give my money to this, because I don't want to encourage it. On the other hand, I don't necessarily feel I can really criticize something I haven't seen, either. Such is the dilemma.

But I am not interested in late-teens FF, a Doom that is a hacker, or for God's sakes, a naked Thing! Can NO ONE get this concept right? It's not that hard. I am pretty sure Marvel Studios could figure it out, so I hope the rights do get back to them.

For me, screwing up Doom is a deal breaker. He's every bit as important to the Marvel Universe as the FF. There's no reason you can't do the actual story. Have Doom and Reed meet in college. They develop a rivalry. Doom is expelled after an experiment goes awry, one which he blames Reed for, and which causes damage to his face. He develops his technology and uses it to elevate himself to ruler of his tiny homeland without a bullet being fired. Meanwhile, Reed has gone on to build his own independent rocket business -all the while working on a technology that will allow faster-than-light travel. Doom watches Reed's success from afar, waiting to strike. Reed and his team, which of course includes Ben, Sue, and Johnny, make a test flight, but are hit by cosmic rays and whammo! get powers. The shielding on the ship was not sufficient -shielding which it turns out came from Doom...I don't know but I think you could keep the essence of the original FF story and Doom's story and make a pretty good movie out of it!

Edo Bosnar said...

Yep, Karen, that's a pretty sensible and solid treatment for an FF movie. So tell me again, why exactly didn't Fox put you in charge of story development?

Ozone said...

That's an excellent treatment, Karen. (Just look at SpaceX's Elon Musk, a modern day Reed Richards if there ever was one) I like the twist about Doom somehow providing the shielding, knowing full well it will fail.

So, he likely anticipates their deaths, but when he sees the four have actually survived he uses his genius to manufacture a suit of armor so he can even the odds, swoop in, and complete his revenge - gauntlets a'blazin' in the classic Doom style of course.

It's entirely possible to make a modern FF film while still maintaining fidelity to the source material. If regular movie-going audiences only knew how wonderful the FF concept is, how great the characters and villains are, they'd fall in love with it as much as we have. Sadly, these movie people seem incapable of getting it done. I have no reason to think they will this time either. - JJ

William said...

Well, the fact that I've read more than one article that said the actors were told NOT to read any of the comics, because this movie wouldn't be following the comics, is a pretty good indicator that most of us will probably not be too happy with this film.

Here are links to a couple of the articles I'm referring to.

http://www.blastr.com/2014-7-15/why-fantastic-4-director-told-cast-it-wasnt-necessary-read-any-comics

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Why-Fantastic-Four-Cast-Was-Told-Read-Comics-70324.html

Kenn Dunn said...

Reed looks too young to be taken seriously. No wonder he causes Doom to be crazed! I have no real problem with Ben, as he should look closer to CGI Hulk than orange-suited Chiklis IMO. And, as with the previous films, neither Storm is blond enough nor sibling-looking enough. And I was OK with the Robinson kids and the Jo's of Petticoat Junction.

Humanbelly said...

Great Petticoat Junction reference, btw, Kenn-!
And of course, not only did those sisters not look like each other OR their "biological" mother, depending on which points in the run you were tuning in, they individually didn't even--uhm-- "look" like the same person anymore. Heh.

HB (the nitpicker's friend)

arw1985 said...

It looks like Solomon Grundy stole the Thing's pants.

Related Posts with Thumbnails