Mr Mold Maker
Master Member
Nope. Constantin Films owns just the Fantastic Four rights. The X-Men film rights are (sadly) owned by 20th Century Fox.
Fantastic Four (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
Nope. Constantin Films owns just the Fantastic Four rights. The X-Men film rights are (sadly) owned by 20th Century Fox.
So that slogan "FROM THE STUDIO THAT BROUGHT YOU X:MEN DAYS OF FUTURE'S PAST" has even less significance now. Outside of a potential Marvel deal, what does this film have that's actually good?
crabra comander
Master Member
Constantin films a company owned by: UWE BOLL!!!:eek
It all makes sense now...j/k
It all makes sense now...j/k
thats just mean XD
That statement holds about as much significance as "FROM THE MANUFACTURER THAT BROUGHT YOU THE MUSTANG: INTRODUCING THE FORD PINTO."
I've read online that Fox is still talking about doing FF2.
If that's the case it's just got to be a negotiation tactic for selling rights back to Marvel. The biggest problem with a sequel is that I don't see how the cast would want to reprise their roles. when this iteration of the franchise was near career suicide for everyone involved.
Unless Fox is prepared to pay the actors an obscene amount to get the cast (not gonna happen) we're looking at a major recasting of every principle character. Are they going to look for another black actor for Johnny? They might as well reboot. In all cases Fox would be starting off with tremendous baggage with the FF. Would they dare to risk poisoning the X-Men by doing a crossover right off the bat?
Then again, stupidity was never been a deterrent in the past so we'll see.
If that's the case it's just got to be a negotiation tactic for selling rights back to Marvel. The biggest problem with a sequel is that I don't see how the cast would want to reprise their roles. when this iteration of the franchise was near career suicide for everyone involved.
Unless Fox is prepared to pay the actors an obscene amount to get the cast (not gonna happen) we're looking at a major recasting of every principle character. Are they going to look for another black actor for Johnny? They might as well reboot. In all cases Fox would be starting off with tremendous baggage with the FF. Would they dare to risk poisoning the X-Men by doing a crossover right off the bat?
Then again, stupidity was never been a deterrent in the past so we'll see.
firesprite
Master Member
I'm pretty certain the cast is contractually obligated to come back for a sequel unless Fox allows them to bow out...
Good point.
If I were one of the principal characters I'd chew off my right paw to escape from doing a sequel.
I think the fact that they cast nobodies in the movie to start with was a tactic showing how little faith they had in, they knew it wasn't going to make money so they spent as little as possible which is what they'd do with a sequel. I'm pretty sure the founders of every studio in Hollywood are spinning in their graves.
You hit the nail on the head. This is all I was going to write, (except I thought Dr. Doom was OK in the 2005 version).
I was itching to get out of the theater during the last 45 minutes or so.
I just back from the theater actually, and am going to watch the 2005 version right now to take the bad taste away.
At least THOSE got along and definitely had chemistry, even when they were being 'mean' to each other.
Tribal Spaceman
Active Member
Johnny and Ben were pretty perfect in the previous movies, and Doom started off bad but improved and probably would have been great had they gone for a third movie at the time.
This new one just sounds like a mess. I still want to see it though.
This new one just sounds like a mess. I still want to see it though.
Despite the bomb that was Fant4stic I think Fox will never give FF back to Marvel/Disney if only to block M/D from getting another blockbuster.
I think the studio was half-hearted about the production (and support) because they figured that, even a lousy movie, could at least break even.
I don't think they imagined it would tank this bad.
Still, I have no doubt they're going to keep FF in their pocket ... and take it out periodically to beat on like a redheaded stepchild.
I think the studio was half-hearted about the production (and support) because they figured that, even a lousy movie, could at least break even.
I don't think they imagined it would tank this bad.
Still, I have no doubt they're going to keep FF in their pocket ... and take it out periodically to beat on like a redheaded stepchild.
I think you mean they didn't imagine it would... Trank this bad... :cool
Also, as a red-headed step-child, I object to your last comment. I've never been beaten.
--Jonah
Okay, Trank is a bit of a jerkass, but damn, I didn't realize it was THIS bad...
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/fantastic-four-got-so-bad-miles-teller-and-josh-126670602777.html
Forget not being at the helm of a sequel... If any of this is true, I'd be surprised if he found work again at all...
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/fantastic-four-got-so-bad-miles-teller-and-josh-126670602777.html
Forget not being at the helm of a sequel... If any of this is true, I'd be surprised if he found work again at all...
Solo4114
Master Member
Being a jerkwad alone doesn't end your career in Hollywood. Being a jerkwad who doesn't make money will, though. But then, just not making money alone can do that, too.
I haven't followed the allegations about production disasters and scandals particularly closely, but I can't help but wonder whether Trank's behavior is, at least partially, down to realizing fairly early on that he'd been thrown to the wolves by a callous studio, and basically set up to fail. Now, it's fair to say that one's behavior after realizing this is the real tell of what kind of person you are, and Trank ends up looking wanting, but I think there's plenty of blame to go around in this tale.
I haven't followed the allegations about production disasters and scandals particularly closely, but I can't help but wonder whether Trank's behavior is, at least partially, down to realizing fairly early on that he'd been thrown to the wolves by a callous studio, and basically set up to fail. Now, it's fair to say that one's behavior after realizing this is the real tell of what kind of person you are, and Trank ends up looking wanting, but I think there's plenty of blame to go around in this tale.
Father
Sr Member
If Fox only has the distribution rights, then there's still hope Disney could buy the rights from Constantin for a heft price and just not make a movie until the clock runs out with Fox... or take the high road and do like they're doing with the next Spider-Man and share it. I can't even count how many movies I watch now that start out with 2 minutes of different company logos before it even gets to the actual movie. So Fox / Disney wouldn't exactly be out of the norm, would it?
I'm pretty sure he's not the first guy to throw a studio under the bus and/or distance himself from the final version of a movie.
Of those that have done it in the past, I'm not sure how many had much street cred to back them up for future endeavors though.
Didn't Ridley Scott say he hated the theatrical release of Alien or Blade Runner?
James Cameron didn't like the theatrical cut of The Abyss did he?
That's the whole reason we have "The Director's Cut" version of so many movies.
I'm not sure if with this movie it was the editing/cut of the movie or if the execs actually kept him from actually making the movie how he wanted to and the cut we have couldn't be rearranged any other way than what was delivered.
I still want to see this one. I've been listening to the score and it's not horrible so I have some hope it'll at least be one of those movies that was horrible but repeat watchable... like Deep Blue Sea or Never Back Down or the Star wars prequels.
I was never a big F4 comic reader so I don't know if Johnny is supposed to be arrogant and full of himself or if that was how Chris Evans played him. It makes sense for him to be that way. He's a pilot and he ends up getting a cool power.
I'm not a fan of the kid that played him in the latest version. I think he comes off that way in everything he's in. Definitely put off that vibe in Friday Night Lights.
I'm pretty sure he's not the first guy to throw a studio under the bus and/or distance himself from the final version of a movie.
Of those that have done it in the past, I'm not sure how many had much street cred to back them up for future endeavors though.
Didn't Ridley Scott say he hated the theatrical release of Alien or Blade Runner?
James Cameron didn't like the theatrical cut of The Abyss did he?
That's the whole reason we have "The Director's Cut" version of so many movies.
I'm not sure if with this movie it was the editing/cut of the movie or if the execs actually kept him from actually making the movie how he wanted to and the cut we have couldn't be rearranged any other way than what was delivered.
I still want to see this one. I've been listening to the score and it's not horrible so I have some hope it'll at least be one of those movies that was horrible but repeat watchable... like Deep Blue Sea or Never Back Down or the Star wars prequels.
I was never a big F4 comic reader so I don't know if Johnny is supposed to be arrogant and full of himself or if that was how Chris Evans played him. It makes sense for him to be that way. He's a pilot and he ends up getting a cool power.
I'm not a fan of the kid that played him in the latest version. I think he comes off that way in everything he's in. Definitely put off that vibe in Friday Night Lights.
firesprite
Master Member
Johnny is absolutely cocky and full of himself in the comics. The portrayal from Chris Evans was pretty much spot-on to his behavior in the comics. Unfortunately, that's why I kind of look down on their casting Johnny as a black kid. I think if they wanted to actually make some sort of statement with the casting, they should have had Michael B Jordan play Reed. Not only would it have been an "against type" role for Jordan, it would have been an "against type" casting for POC in comics movies.
NOT the Alien Theatrical Cut. He has gone on record in both interviews and the DVD/BluRay linear notes as saying the Theatrical Cut of ALIEN is his prefered cut and giving the new cut the title of "Director's Cut" was more about marketing. His imdb.com page does list him as being the father of Director's Cuts.
James Cameron's initial cut (The Special Edition) was requested by the studio to be trimmed down. When he delivered the studio the a shorter cut of the film, the studio demanded even more cuts! Thankfully Cameron held his ground and managed to cut a deal with Fox that this version will not go through anymore cuts. While he does say in his DVD/BluRay introduction that he prefers the Special Edition (Really? Of all the titles these editions get, the one true Director's Cut is titled "Special Edition"?), he doesn't speak negatively of the theatrical version. It's definitely a director's approved cut, just not his 'preferred' cut. As for the Abyss? I need a refresh in history. Get that film out of the vaults FOX!
In regards to the Fantastic Four? Ugh... I highly doubt Fox will bring Trank back to do a Special Edition. I think everyone, including Trank himself are ready to just write this film off as a loss and move on. The Crossover between this and the X-Men? The sequel that was announced before the film was released? All gone. As for making a deal with Marvel? That's even more uncertain. This film has already showed us that Fox is willing to burn their own hand in order to keep their part of the fire to themselves. To them, losing money and receiving all this bad press is worth it if it denies Marvel the chance to make the Fantastic Four into a money maker. Marvel has denied Fox the rights to use characters in their movies, Fox has the rights to deny Marvel their 'first family'.
Father
Sr Member
I'm sure in this progressive age we live in even questioning "Why does he need to be played by a black guy?" is considered racist, but... why? Why do any of them need to be a black guy. for the sake of breaking barriers? If you want to break barriers, go work for Marvel or DC, create an iconic character that is black, and THEN make a movie based off the character. You're not progressing anything by just changing the color of a character that's been white since they were first drawn. It's just an easy way to come off as progressive and it really just comes off as cheap and taking the easy way out in my opinion. It's mindless PC-ism with no real purpose aside from maybe trying to appeal more to another race demographic. Whether there are any kind of statistics generated from ticket sales that show that more black people saw the movie because they have a black person in a key role I'd say is pretty difficult to come up with... especially when the movie failed EVERYWHERE.
Why not make Ben the black buy? Because it would make people mad that the Thing is made of brown rocks instead of orange or that the black guy lost his identity by losing his color ot orange?
When I first heard they cast Michael B Jordan as Johnny and Kate Mara as Sue, my initial reaction was "Why have Sue Storm be white?". I mean, if you're going to have the biological Storms be black, go all out! It would certainly make up for that almost offensive portrayal of Sue Storm from Tim Story's Fantastic Four where they gave Jessica Alba a blonde wig and blue contacts. For your point, I would totally have been down for Michael B Jordan as Reed.
Similar threads
