The Zone

by **bastard_robo** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:49 am

Im watching Fantastic 4 on DVD right now... and i love it....

All of its shit and workig quirks.....

by **Agent Alonzo** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:56 am

If it is the Roger Corman version I respect you...

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:01 am

I dug F-4...I'm not ashamed

by **Agent Alonzo** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:08 am

You ran through a junior high, without pants, screaming 'Allah loves Pancakes', so I don't think you are a good yardstick on shame...

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:10 am

Good point....not to mention the time I got arrested in the women's restroom at Target...

by **Shane** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:25 am

|I like it.

And |It kept my 5 yr old and 3 yr old's attention better than most movies even the Icredibles.

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:28 am

Yeah, kids really dig it

by **Shane** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:29 am

In the beginning and even now the FF was never a verry grown up book in the first place.

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:38 am

Anybody who says "wtf? That's stupid" about the artificial-gravity on the space-station is going into FF with the wrong attitude. And I've heard ALOT of people say the movie lost them from that point on. Um, the fact that they are even ON a space-station in the first place is stupid. That ANY Marvel-characters (X-men, spiderman, whatever) go into outer-space at all, is stupid. Like any of the comics, cartoons etc. ever dealt with weightlessness or any type of physics in a realistic manner anyway? And let's not forget Superman II? The fuckers are breathing and talking on the fucking moon. That movie is a classic but FF is childish and cheap? Like Shane said, FF wasn't too hardcore to begin with. If Stan Lee himself can enjoy the movie, I think we can too.

by **Adam Balm** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:45 am

wonkabar wrote:Anybody who says "wtf? That's stupid" about the artificial-gravity on the space-station is going into FF with the wrong attitude.

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:48 am

Adam Balm wrote:
wonkabar wrote:Anybody who says "wtf? That's stupid" about the artificial-gravity on the space-station is going into FF with the wrong attitude.

by **Adam Balm** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:49 am

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:53 am

8)

by **Adam Balm** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 5:00 am

In all seriousness though, I thought the movie was okay. It was stupid fun, that could've been brilliant fun in the hands of someone competent.

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 5:27 am

I agree. But I do wonder if the material itself precludes it from ever being truly brilliant. Kinda like Steven King novels. They have to undergo major changes to the core story in order to overcome their fundemental lameness. The more faithful the King-adaptation, the cheezier the film, hence The Shining is the least cheezy because it is also the least faithful. So by this same reasoning I feel that if FF were in the hands of someone more competent, it could have been brilliant, but would have needed to sacrifice some of the fun....I don't know what I'm talking about, it was stupid...but I liked it....but then again I have a soft-spot for Battlefield-Earth

by **Adam Balm** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 5:35 am

wonkabar wrote: So by this same reasoning I feel that if FF were in the hands of someone more competent, it could have been brilliant, but would have needed to sacrifice some of the fun....I don't know what I'm talking about, it was stupid...but I liked it....but then again I have a soft-spot for Battlefield-Earth

So Spider-Man 1 and 2 weren't fun? I wore myself out trying to explain this to people, that fun is not mutually exclusive to quality. The Spider-Man comics were just as silly and joky as the FF ones. Would having more believable characters with without cringe-inducing dialog have made the movie less of a blast? No. Rocky was a fun movie, a popcorn movie. The first Superman movie was fun and silly at times, and a great ride. The difference is there's an emotional depth to those two movies that you won't find in FF, and that's sad.

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:15 am

There is a bit of fun missing from the Spidey-movies. I'm not saying FF is better by any means, but alot of these comic-book movies try too hard to make the hero into a regular person. It was kinda cool to see regular people become SUPERHEROS. I thought it was refreashing to see FF embrace that concept rather than avoid it. Peter Parker and the X-Men aren't SUPERHEROS. Parker is barely even a hero much less super. Two movies of him being conflicted is enough. How little kids respond to it is telling...Spiderman hardly holds their attention, but I've seen kids as young as three just eat FF up. I mean, obviously Spiderman is a better film, clearly X-men had more effort put into it. But one could say the same thing about WYATT EARP, and you know what? I still like TOMBSTONE better. Look I know FF isn't a quality film, but it had a bubbly optimism that seems to be missing from so many hero-flicks these days including SW. It kind of reminded me Superman-The Movie a little. It's this fluffy lighthearted attitude that seems to be one of the main critizisms of the film. And I think THAT'S sad. I sometimes wonder if Supes were released today if people would say that it sucks.

by **Adam Balm** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:33 am

Would it be futile to bring up the idea that the Fantastic Four aren't so much superhero(e)s in the comics, but are more scientists and explorers? They don't fight crime, they don't have secret identities. (They didn't even have costumes at first and Stan Lee was dead against the idea, but changed his mind later...) Mark Waid brought this idea back in his run, which has been explored very well in Ultimate Fantastic Four. I was watching the Right Stuff on New Year's Eve and seeing how The FF resemble the Mercury 7 astronauts more than they resemble batman or superman, and I've come to think that they were Stan Lee's greatest inspiration. (Well, besides the Challengers of the Uknown who also aren't really superheroes either.) Which isn't that crazy a thought seeing how Stan Lee was writing it in 1961 when we were scrambling to get the first American into space, after Gararin's flight.

by **RogueScribner** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:34 am

The fundamental flaw with the FF movie wasn't its lightheartedness or lack of serious drama, it was the fact that the characters were barely sketched in the script and there was no real conflict in the story outside of some special-episode-sitcom stuff. The movie was a series of vignettes that climaxed with a zero hour showdown with the bad guy. A better script that told an actual story with actual characters (not caricatures) would have been great.

As it is, FF is kind of mediocre. It's a kids film. If that's all it was meant to be, fine, but don't expect me to like it all that much.

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:37 am

This review pretty much nails it for me.
http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=reviews&id=3601

by **Adam Balm** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:38 am

Yeah, I think we all read it, and were all a little shocked to see Devin give it a better grade than Batman Begins...

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:44 am

HE GAVE IT A BETTER GRADE THAN BB?!?!??

by **Adam Balm** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:46 am

Yeah, it was a little bit of controversy when he did. Hence one of many reasons why there's a bit of Devin bashing round these parts, but I'm not naming names...

...

(*cough* Burl *cough*)

by **colonel_lugz** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:50 am

FF?......meh..

didnt think it was what it could have been, some great moments but you could see all them in the trailer and save yourself 2 hours

by **ZombieZoneSolutions** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:51 am

F4 does have one thing going for it...

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:57 am

Wow, I somehow missed that controversy. I don't think I'm too cool with his BB-review either....I can kinda see what he's saying...a little, but he's way too hard on it. How can you be so forgiving of FF and so hard on BB? Maybe it's cuz he thinks BB is aiming higher, therefore he can have a harsher standard?....I don't know. I do know that BB was one of the best movies I saw last year.

by **wonkabar** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 6:58 am

ZombieZoneSolutions wrote:F4 does have one thing going for it...

Yeah, maybe that's the real reason I dug FF so much

by **colonel_lugz** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 8:39 am

hmmmm, now i think about it........yeah

by **zombieslayer** on Sat Jan 07, 2006 11:07 am

Adam Balm wrote:Yeah, I think we all read it, and were all a little shocked to see Devin give it a better grade than Batman Begins...

That sounds like the sort of thing Kirk would say to a supercomputer that's the overlord of a planet of downtrodden humanoids, to which the supercomputer replies "BUT THIS IS IRRATIONAL... ILLOGICAL..." *BOOM*

by **The Vicar** on Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:58 pm

Adam Balm wrote:In all seriousness though, I thought the movie was okay. It was stupid fun, that could've been brilliant fun in the hands of someone competent.

And therein lies the problem - those of us who wanted the brilliance have a hard time choking down the stupid fun. I thought it was entertaining, but dammit I wanted more. I was at least relieved to see they got Ben Grimm pretty much right.

by **burlivesleftnut** on Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:43 pm

Adam Balm wrote:Yeah, it was a little bit of controversy when he did. Hence one of many reasons why there's a bit of Devin bashing round these parts, but I'm not naming names...

...

(*cough* Burl *cough*)

This makes no sense. I bash Devin because he's a pompous self-important goofball. AND the way he feels he has to throw out all these trivial knowledge about NYC is annoying. My bashing him has nothing whatsoever to do with his lame view of Batman Begins or his positive view of Fantastic Four.

Also, other than now, when have I ever bashed Devin?

The Zone

I have a confession to make....

I have a confession to make....

Who is online