Marvel Hits Refresh Button On Fantastic Four

[Brazoo]

Maybe I'm weird, but I kind of liked the suit. I believed the Thing more than the Hulk in the Ang Lee flick.

Chris

The Hulk was unconvincing - I agree. I'm not 100% crazy about him in either of the movies so far, though. Full CG characters standing next to real people never works 100% - for me.

I'm usually on the side of physical effects over CG - especially for characters - but I've seen great examples of makeup and puppetry mixed with CG now - and I think that can look phenomenal.

To me, this just looks B-movie grade - he looks plastic and lifeless, and the scales look like painted foam rubber to me:



That whole movie looked like junk to me - and I never saw the second one.

[Hector]

A big part of the problem for the look of the Thing/Grimm...is that actor Michael Chiklis...was way too short for the part...simple as that.

[Hector]

I don't care what anybody says...Alba was a hot-looking Sue Storm...

[emeraldknight47]

I don't care what anybody says...Alba was a hot-looking Sue Storm...

http://www.popcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/jessica-alba-3-500x750.jpg

Ditto, that, Hector. Alba looks HAWT in just about ANYTHING. I just wish she'd take the plunge and look HAWT in nothing at all onscreen while she's still got the bod for it....!

[Hector]

[thunderbolt]

^^^
I think they need to go CGI with the Thing as well. Preferably Ron Perlman in a motion capture suit (since he's no longer doing the make-up thing after the second Hellboy).

He said he'd do it for HB3 if Del Toro directs it. And I think he may be GDT's pick for the Frankenstein Monster if that ever happens. Perlman would be a great voice actor for a cgi Thing.

[ctc]

>I love the FF - and pick one up here and there - but it never seems good enough.

It could be you. You might have outgrown the book. It happens. No biggie.

I've been picking up them phonebook lookin' Essentials from Marvel (and the DC Showcase ones) 'cos I do still get a kick out of the old stuff, and I didn't care for it when I was a kid so it's new to me. But I was amazed that everything that would EVER happen in the FF comic happens in the first 50 issues or so.

Don C.

[madmarva]

I was amazed that everything that would EVER happen in the FF comic happens in the first 50 issues or so.

Yeah, scripters have been doing their version of the first 50 to 100 issues of FF for 40 years. The current writer Hickman has brought a sense of grandeur back to the book, but really like most super-hero comics it's the same old meal, served with a different sauce.

[Brazoo]

But I was amazed that everything that would EVER happen in the FF comic happens in the first 50 issues or so.

Don C.

Yeah, scripters have been doing their version of the first 50 to 100 issues of FF for 40 years. The current writer Hickman has brought a sense of grandeur back to the book, but really like most super-hero comics it's the same old meal, served with a different sauce.

Yeah - you both nailed exactly what I was trying to say - it just gets dragged forward decade to decade.

I grew up with John Byrne on the book - and he used that material with interesting twists. I think a lot of that still holds up because he really knew the characters and new how to advance them in slightly new ways - plus he just had nutty and creative ideas for stories, but then the reset button was hit right when he left - as it always is in Marvel - and it got boring quick.

Ben left in the 80s for a bit, in the 90s Reed was dead for a bit, and in this decade Torch was dead for a bit --- it's just too easy to be any fun for me. These guys just don't seem to really come out to play - or maybe they're such fans that they can't see past what they were given before. Byrne's crazy ego was probably a huge asset.

I wasn't nuts about the She-Thing (or whatever they called her - I forget now), but I thought Walt Simonson played around a bit and had some decent issues.

Don - I'd argue the best and most iconic run was from about issue 41 to about 80ish - not the first 50 though. The epic multi-issue interweaving story-lines, bigger cosmic scope, and character development was in that second half of the Kirby/Lee run - and that's the key to the whole thing to me.

[ctc]

>like most super-hero comics it's the same old meal, served with a different sauce

That's about the bestest analogy I've ever heard.

>I think a lot of that still holds up because he really knew the characters and new how to advance them in slightly new ways

Key being "slightly." He still couldn't do too much, and there were analogs of what he did.... to differing degrees.... in the preceeding stories.

>but then the reset button was hit right when he left - as it always is in Marvel - and it got boring quick.

I wouldn't blame Marvel though; the problem is the nature of publishing: a perpetual book HAS to go on. Once your characters have been marketed beyond the book you're FURTHER hampered 'cos you have to maintain the "brand standard." That's why I wonder so much about them doing an "absolute" kind of origin: the nature of the biz indicates it'll HAVE to change again at some point, and I'm curious about how they'll deal with that. (I'll have my answer in 20 years....) It'll be especially exacerbated if they keep the origin in print. Will we see a comic version of #3?:

5 Sci-Fi Ad Techniques That Are About to Make Life Creepier | Cracked.com

>I'd argue the best and most iconic run was from about issue 41 to about 80ish - not the first 50 though.

50 isn't an exact number, and I can see your point. The slightly later stuff was overall better; but it still drew heavily from stories and ideas planted in the earliest issues. That's why I use the earlier issues when I bracket when it was "all done."

Don C.