Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sethos

Fantastic Four 2

Recommended Posts

No idea what the film itself'll be like, but that's a damn fine teaser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the first one despite all the bits that were (unintentionally) goofy or didn't make sense, so I'm looking forward to this. Still not sure about the FF's habit of incurring ridiculous levels of property damage, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the first to be an entertaining, but excessively inept film.

Liked many bits tough, if only there wouldnt have been some others which made me nauseous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I liked the first one despite all the bits that were (unintentionally) goofy or didn't make sense, so I'm looking forward to this. Still not sure about the FF's habit of incurring ridiculous levels of property damage, though.

 

 

I gave the first one a miss, since I love the Lee/Kirby Fantastic Four far too much to be able to fairly judge a none-too-faithful adaptation on its own merits - the generally negative buzz didn't give me much impetus to try, either, although I've since heard that, divorced from the weight of any expectations of quality, it's actually tolerably entertaining, in an undemanding way. Much the same reason I didn't bother with Constanteen until a whim struck me last week, in fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never read the original Fantastic Four comics so deviations from the original setup didn't bother me. I'd say it's worth borrowing or renting cheaply. There are some appallingly lazy scenes, though, and the fact that the Four don't actually have any kind of enemy until the last half hour spoils it a bit. Feels like it's all setup. Still, I'm looking forward to this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first film was an unfettered, steaming pile of dogshit---- the kind so rank that not even a dog who eats its own shit would bother with it.

 

I'm not expecting much from the sequel, especially if it has the same creatives behind it (which it probably does), but I'll admit that that was a cool teaser trailer.

 

One thing about SS that bothered me was his intangibility power--- I don't remember that in the comics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing about SS that bothered me was his intangibility power--- I don't remember that in the comics.

 

It's not something I can recall him specifically doing in the comics, but it's not something which would have felt out of place, either. The Power Cosmic, and all that. The bit where he melts through his board does a nice job of representing the notion that the board is an extension of the Surfer himself, which occasionally came up in the comics, too.

 

 

James - I'm not entirely sure that you'd get as much out of it as me, but the original Fantastic Four run is, by a considerable distance, my favourite 'proper' superhero comic ever (ie., disregarding Flex Mentallo which, while undoubtedly a superhero book, represents something a bit different). You should check some of them out, particularly since the (perfectly decent-looking) B&W ESSENTIAL trades are so cheap. Volume 3 is probably the best of the lot.

 

 

If the film comes on telly here, or if someone I know comes into possession of it on DVD, I'll check it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about getting the Essential trades at Bristol last year but plumped for Punisher MAX instead. Some of the Kirby art that I've seen was astounding (just to resurrect an old, old thread: I'll concede that the man may well have been a genius) but I didn't know whether the story would hold my interest long enough to make reading worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm guessing that, much like the first installment, the real villain (Galactus) will only show up at the very end of the film?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey! Here's an idea for this film! Actually have something happen before the last 15 minutes of the film!

Yeah....this'll probably be adapted from Warren Ellis' Ultimate Galactus Trilogy....

 

I've got to say, if you're going to use the Silver Surfer, who I think is a great character mind and not using Galactus for the second film would have been the most idiotic idea ever, doing a scene where he melts through his surfboard so as to show the board is an extension of himself (as Mark said) is a direction you MUST go to draw audiences attention away from the fact that THE GUY SURFS THROUGH SPACE ON A SURFBOARD!

The actual character design? Beautiful!

Draw attention away from what the Silver Surfer's merkaba actually looks like and to the fact that he's a cosmic powered alien who just happened to have picked a symbol to travel through space, rather than you know actually picking out a surfboard to surf through space on which is just plain stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiderlegs

I couldn't stand the first one. My 8 year old even thought it was silly. I can't believe it made enough money to warrant a sequel, but it must have...

 

This trailer, though--this looks cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, Spider: if the point of the first one was just getting the set up done with so that they could concentrate on actually telling a story in any subsequent films, then that seems fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly so, dogpoet; but they did such a shitty job of the setup that they've probably scared off a lot of potential fans of the sequels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dunno, Spider: if the point of the first one was just getting the set up done with so that they could concentrate on actually telling a story in any subsequent films, then that seems fair enough.

 

 

It may suggest the possibility of a surprisingly-good sequel (we'll just have to wait and see), but it's most definitely not 'fair enough' if the bottom line remains that the first film was unsatisfying. Would an excellent sequel, which took advantage of the fact that the world and characters had already been introduced and established in the first film to tell a compelling and well-realised new story, retroactively make Constanteen any less awful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would an excellent sequel, which took advantage of the fact that the world and characters had already been introduced and established in the first film to tell a compelling and well-realised new story, retroactively make Constanteen any less awful?

I'm not sure that comparison really works: the first FF film was bad, but it wasn't anything like that bad. Perhaps Batman Returns might be a better example?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure that comparison really works: the first FF film was bad, but it wasn't anything like that bad.

 

It doesn't need to be for the analogy to work. That's what makes it an analogy. Anyway, I really can't see how Batman Returns would be an improvement. Even if you do think it's massively superior to the original Batman (and you're welcome to do so...we're all wrong occasionally ;) ), that isn't exactly a commonly-held opinion, which confuses the issue considerably. That's why I chose Constanteen as my example in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Constanteen or the first Burton Batman?

Batman was an incoherent mess, further spoiled by Jack Nicholson camping incessantly whenever he's onscreen (I can't be the only person who thinks his performance goes down the toilet after he gets his face messed up, he's much more impressive as Jack Napier than he is as the Joker): the sequel has a remarkably creepy turn from Danny Devito, Michelle Pfeiffer in PVC (not necessarily a plot plus, of course, but I enjoyed it), Christopher Walken using his years of experience to play a complete and utter shit with great conviction, a far more coherent story than the first one managed and thus a better setting for Burton's traditional set pieces, and it also gives Michael Keaton more material to work with than he had in the first film.

If we are talking about a not completely succesful first act being followed by a better sequel, it seems a better argument than Constanteen, at least until such time as the planned sequel emerges and turns out to be a good film. There's also the fact that the first FF film wasn't bad as such, just a mess, which is pretty much what I have against the first Batman (though that one isn't quite as much of a mess).

Still, if we're talking hypothetical sequels, would a second Daredevil flick doing Fall From Grace justice be seen as adequete excuse for the first one completely messing up Elektra, given that they wouldn't have to go through all of the stuff about the Kingpin killing his father and the only woman he ever loved (less convincing in that film as it seemed to follow a one night stand and she obviously wasn't his first love, but the point more or less stands without being propped up...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But even a cursory scan of various film review and fan sites reveals that your opinion is a fairly unpopular one. The overwhelming consensus opinion regards Batman as the better of the two films*. You're welcome to disagree with that assessment, of course, but acting as though it doesn't exist, and that everyone really agrees with you, is just daft.

 

As to everything else...go back and re-read my initial post, since you appear to have misunderstood the (very simple) point I was making. You suggested that the fact that Fantastic Four contained too much setup for not enough payoff would be justified ("fair enough") if the sequel took advantage of that to tell a great story, free from the constraints of establishing the universe, characters et al. I disagreed with you - yes, it could make for a good sequel, but it wouldn't retroactively make the first film any less of a failure. Either way, though, we were talking, very clearly, about hypothetical, as-yet-unseen potential sequels to poorly-received franchise-starters. In that context, your reference to Batman Returns makes little sense to me.

 

*EDIT - not entirely true, apparently - looks like Returns has more online defenders than I'd thought, so "overwhelming consensus" was an exaggeration. Still, the subject is more than contentious enough that the rest of my point stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*EDIT - not entirely true, apparently - looks like Returns has more online defenders than I'd thought, so "overwhelming consensus" was an exaggeration. Still, the subject is more than contentious enough that the rest of my point stands.

A lot more, and not just online, either.

 

I have no idea what this problem you have with allowing a sequel to take backstory for granted and get on with something else is in this context: it took Kirby and Lee the best part of five years to set the stage for galactus, did it not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...