The Fantastic Four: First Steps (2025)

[BluBonnet]

F4 is coming back to Dolby screens at AMC (for at least 1 daily showing, depending on theater). Gonna get a chance to watch it in Dolby a few more times

Oh and here's some more concept art:

[levcore]

Originally Posted by Karate_Bullfrog

So this is your FF lineup?

The Underwhelming Four

[MWF6425]

According to Superhero Hype, Dawn of the Discs has announced the 4K release for October 28th...just in time for Haloween.

Seriously though, I love the movie; it made me laugh and cry in all the best ways. I honestly think it's one of the best entries in the whole MCU, a solid 9/10 in every regard.

[levcore]

High praise indeed.

[Karate_Bullfrog]

I can’t deny that Pascal isn’t my ideal choice to be a leading man, or Reed Richards. Like if I want an actor with a Hispanic background to play Mr. Fantastic, I’d go with Oscar Isaac, or Javier Bardem. If I was going to lean into him being a nerdy weirdo, and get a veteran big star, I’d say Jim Carry. Who knows, maybe something like the later could’ve sparked a bigger box office return? Ultimately this didn’t really work, and I blame that more on the IP itself, and overall the Marvel studio labeled movies don’t bring in the crowds like it did before for more obscure stuff with unproven stars. Past this phase, it’s X-Men, or bust outside of the Spider-Man series.

[BluBonnet]

New haul. This movie has got me really excited about comics again.

[levcore]

Jim Carrey for Mr Fantastic? Come on lol.

[Karate_Bullfrog]

Originally Posted by levcore

Jim Carrey for Mr Fantastic? Come on lol.

I mean they didn’t do all that much stretchy stuff in this one. So why not try to save even more money on the budget by hiring the famous rubber comedian?

[starmike]

Originally Posted by Karate_Bullfrog

I mean they didn’t do all that much stretchy stuff in this one. So why not try to save even more money on the budget by hiring the famous rubber comedian?

Because Vanessa fought for Pedro to be in the movie.

[Karate_Bullfrog]

Double post

[MWF6425]

Originally Posted by Karate_Bullfrog

I can’t deny that Pascal isn’t my ideal choice to be a leading man, or Reed Richards. Like if I want an actor with a Hispanic background to play Mr. Fantastic, I’d go with Oscar Isaac, or Javier Bardem. If I was going to lean into him being a nerdy weirdo, and get a veteran big star, I’d say Jim Carry. Who knows, maybe something like the later could’ve sparked a bigger box office return? Ultimately this didn’t really work, and I blame that more on the IP itself, and overall the Marvel studio labeled movies don’t bring in the crowds like it did before for more obscure stuff with unproven stars. Past this phase, it’s X-Men, or bust outside of the Spider-Man series.

A lot of folks didn't know who Iron Man was either, 17 years ago...and Robert Downey was far from bankable too. Wesley Snipes was already famous before "Blade", while Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen were risky, since they were primarily known from "Star Trek TNG" and "Gods & Monsters", respectively. Hugh Jackman famously replaced Dougray Scott for Wolverine, and Famke Janssen was probably the highest-profile member of the original X-Men students too. Tobey Maguire had gained major respect before "Spider-Man", but he was still a considerable risk, beating Leonardo DiCaprio, Freddie Prinze Jr., Heath Ledger, Scott Speedman, and his on-screen pal James Franco.

Marvel is known for taking risky gambles; some of them pay off better than others, but that's just how the business works. Chris Evans was primarily known for comedy before "The First Avenger" was made, and the most widely recognizable actor from the original "Avengers" film was Samuel L. Jackson. Scarlett Johansson's biggest success was "He's Just Not That Into You", an ensemble piece that made $178.9 million on a $40 million budget. Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Tom Hiddleston, Cobie Smulders - none of them were huge back then. Jeremy Renner got two Oscar nominations though, for "The Hurt Locker" and "The Town".

[Karate_Bullfrog]

Originally Posted by starmike

Because Vanessa fought for Pedro to be in the movie.

I’m not sure what a behind the scenes factoid has to do with a joke retort to my fan casting of Reed Richards?

[levcore]

Originally Posted by Karate_Bullfrog

I mean they didn’t do all that much stretchy stuff in this one. So why not try to save even more money on the budget by hiring the famous rubber comedian?

Ah I get the logic now!

[50strat54]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

Any day now, I expect some folks are going to march all the way to Burbank and demand to examine the books.... good luck with that

Because you won't let us!

[Karate_Bullfrog]

Originally Posted by MWF6425

A lot of folks didn't know who Iron Man was either, 17 years ago...and Robert Downey was far from bankable too. Wesley Snipes was already famous before "Blade", while Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen were risky, since they were primarily known from "Star Trek TNG" and "Gods & Monsters", respectively. Hugh Jackman famously replaced Dougray Scott for Wolverine, and Famke Janssen was probably the highest-profile member of the original X-Men students too. Tobey Maguire had gained major respect before "Spider-Man", but he was still a considerable risk, beating Leonardo DiCaprio, Freddie Prinze Jr., Heath Ledger, Scott Speedman, and his on-screen pal James Franco.

Marvel is known for taking risky gambles; some of them pay off better than others, but that's just how the business works. Chris Evans was primarily known for comedy before "The First Avenger" was made, and the most widely recognizable actor from the original "Avengers" film was Samuel L. Jackson. Scarlett Johansson's biggest success was "He's Just Not That Into You", an ensemble piece that made $178.9 million on a $40 million budget. Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Tom Hiddleston, Cobie Smulders - none of them were huge back then. Jeremy Renner got two Oscar nominations though, for "The Hurt Locker" and "The Town".

But that’s what I’m saying. Pedro as an overexposed lead, or whatever uptight opinion an internet film troll has about him doesn’t really factor into the reason this movie didn’t perform the way some thought. The whole “Put the Marvel name on this, and people will show up theory” doesn’t ring true anymore. More than any one actor, the superhero genre is the most overexposed thing in film today, and people seen quite enough of it to the point they are becoming very picky about it in future for whatever the next superhero film they’ll watch next.

[50strat54]

Originally Posted by starmike

Because Vanessa fought for Pedro to be in the movie.

Interesting, I didn't know that.

[jeff BD]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

If they spent $388 million on Ant-Man and $375 million on Marvels, do you honestly think they "only" spent $200 million on Deadpool & Wolverine?

Yes. The difference between competent and incompetent directors/storytellers.

[MWF6425]

Originally Posted by Karate_Bullfrog

But that’s what I’m saying. Pedro as an overexposed lead, or whatever uptight opinion an internet film troll has about him doesn’t really factor into the reason this movie didn’t perform the way some thought. The whole “Put the Marvel name on this, and people will show up theory” doesn’t ring true anymore. More than any one actor, the superhero genre is the most overexposed thing in film today, and people seen quite enough of it to the point they are becoming very picky about it in future for whatever the next superhero film they’ll watch next.

Folks were already picky about superheroes, long before the MCU...or even the rise of the Internet, for that matter. Michael Keaton's casting in "Batman" has become the stuff of Hollywood legend regarding complaints from comic-book purists, and a lot of people still whine about Jim Carrey being cast in "Batman Forever". As for the original "Superman" films, Lynn Stalmaster said people kept rejecting Christopher Reeve's headshot - Richard Donner and Tom Mankiewicz lobbied hard for his casting. Other films in the genre were either hit or miss, like "The Rocketeer", "The Shadow", "The Phantom", and even "The Crow".

The main difference in recent years is a perception of over-saturation, when in reality that's mainly just Marvel's slice of the pie. DC has done far less overall, and hardly anything has come from independent books in a while. There's been a few successes like "Sin City", "Watchmen", and "V For Vendetta", but they're far from conventional.

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by jeff BD

Yes. The difference between competent and incompetent directors/storytellers.

You think any of these directors have a say? Even Sam Raimi got sidelined and had his movie taken away and rejiggered by Feige.

[Star Lord]

lol