the symbiote reacts to the mental state of the host. That can be a good thing, in the case of Pete and Flash, or apparently a really awful thing if the host is a zombie
0
StraightziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered Userregular
I wonder what kind of budget F4 is working with, because I can't envision anyone going to see that movie. It'll be lucky to pull 30 Million domestic on its opening weekend, and I think the August release date (summer movie graveyard) demonstrates that even Fox knows this.
Even if the movie is good, it feels like they're specifically engineering a thing to not be a hit.
I wonder what kind of budget F4 is working with, because I can't envision anyone going to see that movie. It'll be lucky to pull 30 Million domestic on its opening weekend, and I think the August release date (summer movie graveyard) demonstrates that even Fox knows this.
Even if the movie is good, it feels like they're specifically engineering a thing to not be a hit.
The important thing is looking at the history of F4 as a whole and what themes remained fairly constant throughout the decades: family, exploration, optimism and fun.
I don't understand how someone can look at the golden age of Kirby and Lee and say "I can do better"
You should! Continued improvment is how the medium advances
Trank is outright rejecting the validity of those stories.
It would be one thing if he was...you know, intelligent, and realized that Reed in the Kirby stories attempted to make them famous in order to mask that what actually happend to them was something horrible and he could essentially never be forgiven for his IMMENSE amount of hubris at that moment, so he tried(and succeeded) to make them celeberites in order to shield them from the consequences of his actions, and that this movie would be telling the scenario if he was unable to/didn't.
I wonder what kind of budget F4 is working with, because I can't envision anyone going to see that movie. It'll be lucky to pull 30 Million domestic on its opening weekend, and I think the August release date (summer movie graveyard) demonstrates that even Fox knows this.
Even if the movie is good, it feels like they're specifically engineering a thing to not be a hit.
Eh. Bunch of non comic book readers I know were at least intrigued by the trailer.
I mean, I get why they're doing what they're doing. The previous two movies went with a tone that was similar to the comics (they were just horrible movies, not exactly horrible adaptations) and they tanked.
Doing something that looks similar on the surface could sink the movie, so they're going a completely different (and somewhat intriguing) direction.
0
Mego Thor"I say thee...NAY!"Registered Userregular
I wonder what kind of budget F4 is working with, because I can't envision anyone going to see that movie. It'll be lucky to pull 30 Million domestic on its opening weekend, and I think the August release date (summer movie graveyard) demonstrates that even Fox knows this.
Even if the movie is good, it feels like they're specifically engineering a thing to not be a hit.
Guardians of the Galaxy came out in August
That's true, but it's traditionally been used as a place for summer-styled movies the studios feel are risky or are likely to flop. That has started to change in recent years, but it's still been used to test new franchises (Guardians), uncertain reboots (last year's TMNT), and long-developing or troubled sequels (Sin City 2). If you look at the list of August releases for this year, some of the tent-poles are Fantastic Four, the Hitman reboot, and the long-in-development Man from UNCLE.
Also, no other Marvel movie has ever come out in August, and no other Marvel movie so far is scheduled to be released in August. I'm not totally sure how Guardians ended up in that spot instead of a week earlier.
I wonder what kind of budget F4 is working with, because I can't envision anyone going to see that movie. It'll be lucky to pull 30 Million domestic on its opening weekend, and I think the August release date (summer movie graveyard) demonstrates that even Fox knows this.
Even if the movie is good, it feels like they're specifically engineering a thing to not be a hit.
Eh. Bunch of non comic book readers I know were at least intrigued by the trailer.
I mean, I get why they're doing what they're doing. The previous two movies went with a tone that was similar to the comics (they were just horrible movies, not exactly horrible adaptations) and they tanked.
Doing something that looks similar on the surface could sink the movie, so they're going a completely different (and somewhat intriguing) direction.
I just feel like the franchise needs to be handled in a really particular way to be successful, and that Marvel are probably the only ones who would risk hitting that feeling. F4 isn't X-Men, and it's a lot harder to deal with this material in a way that doesn't feel too campy (like the previous films) or too serious and arguably bland (like the way this version is looking/sounding so far).
They could end up with a really great movie about space explorers who get body-horror powers or whatever, but it won't really be Fantastic Four, and I am not sure how successful that type of thing will be. If they've budgeted this thing to be comparable to one of the Millar/Vaughn/Goldman films, then sure, but otherwise I think they're being pretty risky.
I like the concept a lot of these battle world series but I can't help but feel that tonally speaking they are all on the same side of the coin when it comes to serious interpretations of superheroes vs lighter crazy fantasy stuff.
I'd like to see something that fits more with the avengers series that led into it.
Well presumably Secret Wars itself will be in the same tone what with Hickman writing it
I hope so! It's just that they are doing lots of these other series and they are somewhat tonally samey insofar as how much they want to interact with the genre.
Alright, I really like that Entertainment weekly image.
Do we still not know if Flower Girl is going to be someone from the comics (though, admittedly they're pretty good at burying the lead on that)?
There is a Raina from the comics who is a Savage Land mutate with plant powers and people have speculated she's an Inhuman version of her, what with the whole flower motif
Well presumably Secret Wars itself will be in the same tone what with Hickman writing it
I hope so! It's just that they are doing lots of these other series and they are somewhat tonally samey insofar as how much they want to interact with the genre.
Well, if you're looking for lighter fare, there is the Marvel Babies zone we haven't had a real announcement on yet, as well as the Howard the Duck zone.
Well presumably Secret Wars itself will be in the same tone what with Hickman writing it
I hope so! It's just that they are doing lots of these other series and they are somewhat tonally samey insofar as how much they want to interact with the genre.
I don't really agree with this, though
Marvel Zombies and MZVSAOU are horror comics
Where Monsters Dwell is an adventure comic with no superheroes
Master of Kung-Fu is, well, a mystical kung-fu story that features superheroes but reimagined as kung-fu students and masters
Ghost Racers is a grindhouse action spectacle
MODOK is a crime story, starring MODOK
Thors is being described as more similar to True Detective or Homicide: Life on the Streets starring Norse Gods than a superhero title
Old Man Logan is a revenge western
Like, they all (except for WMD) feature superhero characters but they definitely have unique feels in regards to how much they want to interact with the standard superhero genre (A-Force, Star-Lord and Kitty Pryde) or do their own thing with the characters as a spring board
I mean, the books haven't come out yet so for all we know they do have very similar tones but on paper they seem pretty dang distinct to me. Now obviously if you don't like what they're offering than that's totally fine, different strokes, I just don't think that the offerings so far could be described as same-y at all.
Posts
They actually went into this in the comics, I believe. He can't, essentially, or operates at a severely reduced level.
Steam
edit: oh of fucking course it was written by robert kirkman
I only read the first one
But I had the opposite problem
the symbiote reacts to the mental state of the host. That can be a good thing, in the case of Pete and Flash, or apparently a really awful thing if the host is a zombie
I mean, they can look at those comics and then proceed to not enjoy them
It's really easy, I do it every time I look at them
It is hilarious
And Marvel Zombies Vs. Army of Darkness was aces.
I can safely ignore everything else. But the original run+ the Ultimate Fantastic Four tie in was REALLY good.
Even if the movie is good, it feels like they're specifically engineering a thing to not be a hit.
You should! Continued improvment is how the medium advances
Trank is outright rejecting the validity of those stories.
I respect how important the Lee/Kirby run is
But I personally don't enjoy it that much
The important thing is looking at the history of F4 as a whole and what themes remained fairly constant throughout the decades: family, exploration, optimism and fun.
It would be one thing if he was...you know, intelligent, and realized that Reed in the Kirby stories attempted to make them famous in order to mask that what actually happend to them was something horrible and he could essentially never be forgiven for his IMMENSE amount of hubris at that moment, so he tried(and succeeded) to make them celeberites in order to shield them from the consequences of his actions, and that this movie would be telling the scenario if he was unable to/didn't.
But he's not!
So it's going to be...well....something.
In fact, that is now what I'm pretending this movie is.
I may be remembering it wrong but Lee/Kirby Reed was kind of an asshole and he did it just because
Eh. Bunch of non comic book readers I know were at least intrigued by the trailer.
I mean, I get why they're doing what they're doing. The previous two movies went with a tone that was similar to the comics (they were just horrible movies, not exactly horrible adaptations) and they tanked.
Doing something that looks similar on the surface could sink the movie, so they're going a completely different (and somewhat intriguing) direction.
Now I'll be disappointed when Elijah Snow & the gang fail to show up and kick the ever loving crap out of Nu4.
Thanks; thanks a lot.
That's true, but it's traditionally been used as a place for summer-styled movies the studios feel are risky or are likely to flop. That has started to change in recent years, but it's still been used to test new franchises (Guardians), uncertain reboots (last year's TMNT), and long-developing or troubled sequels (Sin City 2). If you look at the list of August releases for this year, some of the tent-poles are Fantastic Four, the Hitman reboot, and the long-in-development Man from UNCLE.
Also, no other Marvel movie has ever come out in August, and no other Marvel movie so far is scheduled to be released in August. I'm not totally sure how Guardians ended up in that spot instead of a week earlier.
Is it bad that I thought that was Samus at first?
I just feel like the franchise needs to be handled in a really particular way to be successful, and that Marvel are probably the only ones who would risk hitting that feeling. F4 isn't X-Men, and it's a lot harder to deal with this material in a way that doesn't feel too campy (like the previous films) or too serious and arguably bland (like the way this version is looking/sounding so far).
They could end up with a really great movie about space explorers who get body-horror powers or whatever, but it won't really be Fantastic Four, and I am not sure how successful that type of thing will be. If they've budgeted this thing to be comparable to one of the Millar/Vaughn/Goldman films, then sure, but otherwise I think they're being pretty risky.
Visually I like the "Thing on a stick" more than the Thing in the comics.
I'd like to see something that fits more with the avengers series that led into it.
Keepin' that "Inhuman's can get it really fuckin' rough" spirit alive i see
you pays your money, you takes your chances
Do we still not know if Flower Girl is going to be someone from the comics (though, admittedly they're pretty good at burying the lead on that)?
I hope so! It's just that they are doing lots of these other series and they are somewhat tonally samey insofar as how much they want to interact with the genre.
Well, if you're looking for lighter fare, there is the Marvel Babies zone we haven't had a real announcement on yet, as well as the Howard the Duck zone.
Marvel Zombies and MZVSAOU are horror comics
Where Monsters Dwell is an adventure comic with no superheroes
Master of Kung-Fu is, well, a mystical kung-fu story that features superheroes but reimagined as kung-fu students and masters
Ghost Racers is a grindhouse action spectacle
MODOK is a crime story, starring MODOK
Thors is being described as more similar to True Detective or Homicide: Life on the Streets starring Norse Gods than a superhero title
Old Man Logan is a revenge western
Like, they all (except for WMD) feature superhero characters but they definitely have unique feels in regards to how much they want to interact with the standard superhero genre (A-Force, Star-Lord and Kitty Pryde) or do their own thing with the characters as a spring board
I mean, the books haven't come out yet so for all we know they do have very similar tones but on paper they seem pretty dang distinct to me. Now obviously if you don't like what they're offering than that's totally fine, different strokes, I just don't think that the offerings so far could be described as same-y at all.
basically he says that he was approached about being in it, but he turned it down because he believes that Power Rangers are for the children
JDF is a real cool dude, you guys
Edward James Olmos!
Sif is coming back!
More Dr. Hyde please!