|
Post by Torgaman on Feb 12, 2005 12:33:23 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Zone Fighter on Feb 12, 2005 12:37:44 GMT -8
Why do people want to spend their holidays in a crowded movie theater? You wont find me anywhere near War of the Worlds on Independence Day.
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Feb 12, 2005 12:50:50 GMT -8
me either- besides, having seen the trailer for WOTW i think if i want to see it i'll rent the disc of the original. the FF probably did a good thing by going with lesser known stars- i mean, Chris Reeve wasn't a household name when he was cast as Superman. i prefer unknowns, simply because then you don't say- Look, there's George Clooney in a batsuit. or most any other recent example.
|
|
|
Post by Torgaman on Feb 12, 2005 20:59:23 GMT -8
The problem nowadays is people don't want to spend their money on films without known names.And after viewing the trailer for FANTASTIC FOUR it would seem the film could really benefit from some acting muscle.I only recognize Michael Chiklis and Jessica Alba,two leads of tv shows that never drew big ratings.The rest of the cast looks like people whose bulk of acting has been done on movies for LIFETIME channel.
This could be Marvel's first real big box office flop.
|
|
|
Post by Zone Fighter on Feb 12, 2005 21:55:36 GMT -8
Doesn't matter to me who is in a film. I don't recognise most actors and actresses these days. Most of the ones I know of are dead or just not getting parts anymore. Of course I rarely goto movies. I usually wait to rent the DVD (used to be the VHS tape I waited for). When I do got see a film on the big screen it's usually because my sisters suggests that I take my nephew to see a movie. Only reason I saw the two Spiderman films in a theater.
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Feb 12, 2005 23:24:23 GMT -8
first flop? i'd say that would be Electra, or possibly Blade III (and at least story-wise HULK could qualify).
|
|
|
Post by Torgaman on Feb 13, 2005 0:06:43 GMT -8
Well Electra and Blade had known names but they were released at bad times.Summer is the season to release those films.
I still go to the theatre because there are still movies worth seeing.I am not one of those "only movies made before 1975 are any good" types of people.Then again I am also not one of those "only movies made after 1995 are any good" types of people.I like alot of stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Preston on Feb 26, 2005 17:19:19 GMT -8
I'll of course be looking forward to seeing the FANTASTIC FOUR movie but maybe for a different reason than FF-fans. Because one of my favorite kind of superpowers is that of Elasticity. The movie will be the first time we will see Elasticity depicted on live-action film (Not counting the Corman film which had painfully deplorable spfx).
While I'm at it, I should also mention something about the Fantastic Four which I have always found silly and asinine. It has to do with KANG the villainous time-traveller from the future. Let's say that Kang goes back in time to confront the FF in 1966. He gets defeated and is sent back to the future. Then the next time he travels back again, he arrives in 1967, that is, the year following right after the aforementioned 1966. What's really dimwitted is that instead of coming back in the year AFTER the previous fight, Kang should instead time-travel all the way back to the 1950s BEFORE the FF got their superpowers. That way, the FF will be vulnerable or at least very much weaker. Kang's speciality is time travel, so he is easily capable of doing that.
Actually, the whole notion of time travel itself is idiotically preposterous due to its built-in contradictions, in the first place. So KANG is just another variation of time travel's fundamental contradiction.
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Feb 26, 2005 17:53:11 GMT -8
i think you answered your own question.
|
|
|
Post by BaronVonMacheimer on Mar 2, 2005 21:35:15 GMT -8
am i the only one who found David's last post on this subject supremely funny?
|
|
|
Post by Preston on Apr 20, 2005 10:57:30 GMT -8
According to the latest scoop on FF, the HUMAN TORCH will be toned down to the point where all he can do is just shoot flames from his fingers. He won't be able to flame on his entire body.
There are several possible reasons for this toning down. (1) budgetary, or (2) having his entire body flaming on might look too exaggerated, or (3)the fear that kids might try to imitate the Human Torch by setting themselves on fire. That reminds me of the time when the Superman movies came out and some kids imitated Superman by jumping off the roofs of buildings. At least that fear of imitation is one of the three possible reasons I can think of as to why the movie has toned down the Human Torch. I still don't know the specific reason.
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Apr 20, 2005 12:17:35 GMT -8
if kids are dumb enough to think they can shoot fire, well, they need to be weeded out of the gene pool anyway. this does not sound like a great movie already.
David
|
|
|
Post by RoadWarriorYajuta on Apr 21, 2005 16:02:52 GMT -8
Oh jeez louise. This reminds me of that old Saturday Night Live skit with Dan Akyrod in it. He made and sold cheap and dangerous Halloween costumes. His idea for the Human Torch was Oily Rags and a Zippo. As far as this movie, I think it will do well, but not be a huge blockbuster. As far as Jessica Alba being miscast, who cares, she is a hottie.
|
|
|
Post by Preston on Apr 29, 2005 12:01:11 GMT -8
I was talking with an FF-fan about the upcoming film, and the discussion went into what Actor would have been ideal for the role of REED RICHARDS. The actor that the other person came up with is much too old for the role now, but when he was younger, he would have fit the role to a T. The actor's name is RUSSELL JOHNSON who used to appear as the PROFESSOR on the series GILLIGAN'S ISLAND. At that time, Mr. Johnson really fit that role of Professor, was perfectly cast for it. And his physical appearance even resembles Reed Richards or pretty close to it. At least much more so than the actor that has been cast for the upcoming movie. I think that even the way that Mr. Johnson acted in his Professorial role would be the same way he should have acted as Reed Richards if he had the role.
Do any of you FF fans have any other actors you think would fit the role of Reed Richards? RUSSELL JOHNSON is the best I can think of.
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Apr 29, 2005 12:59:26 GMT -8
i agree- he would have been perfect. i always thought Chris Benoit should have been Wolverine, and of course, Vincent Price would have made an excellent Dr. Strange.
|
|
|
Post by Torgaman on Apr 30, 2005 20:09:25 GMT -8
Who else thinks Jessica Alba was miscast as Sue?
Is it just my opinion or is the studio trying to sell the film by how cool they look on the poster?
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Apr 30, 2005 23:08:18 GMT -8
i dunno, but Sue should be a wholesome type, that's for sure, and Reed should look older than Johnny.
David
|
|
|
Post by Preston on Jun 26, 2005 13:27:52 GMT -8
Well, I have to update what I reported earlier about the spfx for the HUMAN TORCH. Although his flame-on was originally limited to flames spurting from only his hand, it has been upgraded to his whole body, according to what I see in the trailers.
Also, the figurine-collectors already beat me to the stores. That is, all the stores in my town are already sold out on the INVISIBLE WOMAN figurines! They still have the rest of the FANTASTIC FOUR, so it's ONLY the INVISIBLE WOMAN that's sold out! I'm of course referring to the figurines made for the Movie, NOT the comic book.
Whenever figurines for a superhero group are released, there are much LESS figurines made for the Female heroines because it is deemed that they won't sell as well. But that always backfires, because the deliberate scarceness makes them rarities. Also there are several Different kinds of figurines for INVISIBLE WOMAN. One where she is fully visible, another where she is half visible and half invisible, and one where she is fully transparent. From what I've seen, the one which is fully transparent is fetching the highest prices for collectors.
For myself, I would get the one which is half visible and half transparent -- it's just like getting two for the price of one, if you know what I mean.
Have any others of you FF fans experienced the same difficulty at getting the figurines in your town? As much as possible, I try to stay away from Ebay because the prices there are out of control -- even though the movie is Not even out yet!
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Jun 26, 2005 23:11:53 GMT -8
i'm way more inclined to see this than the Batman movie. weird, i know.
|
|
|
Post by RoadWarriorYajuta on Jun 27, 2005 7:20:00 GMT -8
I hate to admit it, but this movie is looking good.
|
|
|
Post by Shonokin on Jun 27, 2005 8:02:14 GMT -8
Well, this movie looks like FUN.
How many dark brooding serious comic book movies can ya take without getting jaded. At least with FF it seems they are wanting to have more fun with it.
From seeing the previews I was very sceptical at first, but now that I've seen a trailer in the theater, it seems a lot more cool. Also Ben Grimm seems a lot more "Thing"-like on the big screen, and less like a lump of terracotta clay.
|
|