Fantastic Four from Fox Studios (8/7/15) 1 1

[TheLiamSturgess]

Sub-Mariner is with Universal, not Fox. But I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment

[chezmtghut]

What a missed opportunity. Although it does sound like this would have been an over-crowded -script.

 

FANTASTIC FOUR Screenwriter Jeremy Slater Reveals His Original Epic Plans For The Reboot

 

Before Simon Kinberg and Josh Trank rewrote the screenplay, Jeremy Slater was hired by 20th Century Fox to dream up a new take on the franchise, though he's revealed in an interview with Screen Crush that pretty much none of his ideas ended up making it into the version we got.

 

Explaining that his version of Fantastic Four further delved into the inner workings of the Baxter Foundation and the relationship between Reed and Victor, Slater says that the team would have encountered Annihilus (described as, "a pissed-off cybernetic T-Rex") in the Negative Zone and got hit by radiation giving them their powers. Victor meanwhile would have still been left behind, but he was going to kill Annihilus and use his cosmic control rod to create, "a sort of living body armor."

 

"In addition to Annihilus and the Negative Zone, we had Doctor Doom declaring war against the civilized world, the Mole Man unleashing a 60 foot genetically-engineered monster in downtown Manhattan, a commando raid on the Baxter Foundation, a Saving Private Ryan-style finale pitting our heroes against an army of Doombots in war-torn Latveria, and a post-credit teaser featuring Galactus and the Silver Surfer destroying an entire planet. We had monsters and aliens and Fantasticars and a cute spherical H.E.R.B.I.E. robot that was basically BB-8 two years before BB-8 ever existed. And if you think all of that sounds great...well, yeah, we did, too. The problem was, it would have also been massively, MASSIVELY expensive."

 

But a live version of Annihilus - WOW!

 

If Disney had the rights back, this would have actually been the movie we got. They would have spared no expense to make this happen. Fox is too wrapped up with the X-Men franchise, so why not work something out with Disney that can benefit everyone. Seriously, out of 8 Marvel films Disney has made 6 hit movies in 5 years, while Fox has made 14 Marvel films with 4 or 5 hits in the past 17 year.

[Gatsby77]

I disagree.

 

Given the track record of the last 3 films, I doubt even Disney would risk a $220-$250 production budget on FF.

 

And I don't see any studio being able to do a live action version justice for $140-$180 million or so.

 

I mean, even the X-Men franchise is in trouble.

 

Seriously: Apocalypse did $80 million less domestic and ~$220 million less internationally overall than did Days / Future Past.

 

Given that a $700 million Spider-Man movie led Sony to cancel & re-boot the franchise, when an X-Men movie is pulling it Ant-Man numbers and can't even hit $550 million, there's a problem.

[Bosco685]

Seriously: Apocalypse did $80 million less domestic and ~$220 million less internationally overall than did Days / Future Past.

 

Given that a $700 million Spider-Man movie led Sony to cancel & re-boot the franchise, when an X-Men movie is pulling it Ant-Man numbers and can't even hit $550 million, there's a problem.

 

It really is sad how the X-Franchise latest film is performing. After the last four films (X-Men: First Class; The Wolverine; X-Men: Days of Future Past; Deadpool), it felt like they were getting things back on track.

 

Although there are some great scenes in Apocalypse (Fassbender's family dying and how he responds is a typical solid performance), there isn't enough juice in the film to make it as solid as the last. But it is not a horrible film. There just wasn't this massive WOW factor.

 

I'm hoping Deadpool 2, X-Force and The New Mutants rectifies that. Not sure about Wolverine 3 just yet.

[Bosco685]

[Silver Surfer]

I disagree.

 

Given the track record of the last 3 films, I doubt even Disney would risk a $220-$250 production budget on FF.

 

And I don't see any studio being able to do a live action version justice for $140-$180 million or so.

 

I mean, even the X-Men franchise is in trouble.

 

Seriously: Apocalypse did $80 million less domestic and ~$220 million less internationally overall than did Days / Future Past.

 

Given that a $700 million Spider-Man movie led Sony to cancel & re-boot the franchise, when an X-Men movie is pulling it Ant-Man numbers and can't even hit $550 million, there's a problem.

 

Disney would do it because they would do it right and the long term potential would be great. Its an easy fit to compliment existing properties. Plus its chump change for them.

[Comicopolis]

I finally watched it the other night - I enjoyed it

[Comicopolis]

I still haven't seen this movie.

 

Don't bother, it is pants.

 

Some pants are good.

[revat]

I still haven't seen this movie.

 

Don't bother, it is pants.

 

Some pants are good.

 

I think we call them 'britches' here.

[Comicopolis]

I still haven't seen this movie.

 

Don't bother, it is pants.

 

Some pants are good.

 

I think we call them 'britches' here.

 

Where would we be without them?

[Eric Seffinga]

...cosmic pants.

 

[Mr. Spider-Woman]

I'm still waiting for this to show up on Netflix or Amazon Prime. I suppose I could check to see if it's available at my library but even that seems like a lot of effort for what just about everyone says is a pretty terrible movie.

[NewEnglandGothic]

Two star movie. Not that terrible to a casual viewer, but I can see why FF fans would have concern over a potential franchise. I've seen worse funnybook movies... Batman & Robin, Catwoman, Steel, Crow: Wicked Prayer, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, etc.

[The First Avenger]

I disagree.

 

Given the track record of the last 3 films, I doubt even Disney would risk a $220-$250 production budget on FF.

 

I agree. I've always thought that if they do get the rights back that they would introduce the FF into other films like what they did with Spidey. They could easily add the Reed, Sue, Johnny, and Ben going into space as a side story in a film, maybe have it as an easter egg in the background of a film and have the accident happen in the same movie or the next film that comes after. They could even make it a plot for say Captain Marvel's film. Maybe the shuttle they travel in gets saved by CM in her film and you can introduce the characters/actors in that action sequence. Then in the next Avengers film you can introduce them as the FF, powers and all.

 

I think building them up through a few films and having them as side characters would show the audience that they are in good hands and introduce them as part of the MCU. It would definitely help get the bad taste out of the general audience's mouths this way and you get to build excitement for their solo movie while teasing the ever living out of Doctor Doom.

[Buzzetta]

1 - I tried watching it on HBO... It was horrible and I am not even an FF fan so I could care less either way with some of the changes.

 

2 - Marvel / Disney does not care about the Fantastic Four. They want Galactus and the Silver Surfer and possibly skrulls. They are actually more important to Marvel Movie Universe than Reed and Company.

 

3 - The Thing - There is an outside shot that Marvel wants The Thing back into their fold. The Thing COULD be Marvel's Chewbacca. You have a guy that they only have to cast once in human form and all they need is a voice from that point forward. If the 'voice' wants too much money they find a new voice.

[Bosco685]

Ouch!

 

[media_junkie]

5 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Ouch!

 

At least he can poke fun at himself.  

[paperheart]

skip the article and go to the comments

https://deadline.com/2020/06/fantastic-four-director-josh-trank-says-studio-blocked-him-from-casting-black-actress-as-sue-storm-1202952970/

[media_junkie]

Looking at his IMDB page (which I had never done before), I'm really surprised that Fox gave him the director's chair for what they hoped would be a franchise starter.  He basically had "Chronicle" under his belt, and that was it.  

[Bosco685]

7 hours ago, paperheart said:

skip the article and go to the comments

https://deadline.com/2020/06/fantastic-four-director-josh-trank-says-studio-blocked-him-from-casting-black-actress-as-sue-storm-1202952970/

With the decision to make Franklin Storm and Johnny Storm black, this doesn't sound like much of a stretch.

50 minutes ago, media_junkie said:

Looking at his IMDB page (which I had never done before), I'm really surprised that Fox gave him the director's chair for what they hoped would be a franchise starter.  He basically had "Chronicle" under his belt, and that was it.  

I had read an article this year as part of the Capone film rollout where the thinking was after the massive success of Chronicle he would be able to 'modernize' the franchise. Which doesn't convince me Fox actually came to understand the importance of The Fantastic Four.

The post-disaster artist: After his Fantastic Four reboot bombed and life fell apart, Josh Trank came back for more

Quote

Trank was the obvious candidate to reinvigorate Fantastic Four for 20th Century Fox. In 2010, the studio plucked the then-26-year-old filmmaker from obscurity to direct the microbudgeted Chronicle. The story of three high schoolers who gain, and are torn apart by, superhuman power gave Trank the chance to rewire the “found footage” style with untethered psychic velocity. Critical praise, combined with a new title — the youngest person ever to open a movie at No. 1 at the box office — imbued the filmmaker with the aura of an action auteur. When Chronicle finished its theatrical run with a $123 million worldwide gross, studios scrambled to tap Trank’s energy. Sony attached him to the Spider-Man-adjacent Venom; Warner Bros. wanted him for the spy thriller Red Star; he worked to adapt the beloved video game Shadow of the Colossus; he got a Star Wars movie. At the top of his world, Trank quit drinking, bought a car, and met the love of his life, whom he married six months later.

 

The race to book Trank ended in late 2012 with an offer from Fox to direct Fantastic Four. In the mid-2000s, a pair of lighthearted Fantastic Four films led by Jessica Alba and Chris Evans failed to break through in a zeitgeist captured by Christopher Nolan’s gritty reinvention of Batman. Fox hoped that a modern sensibility could take the property in a new direction, despite veterans like I Am Legend writer Akiva Goldsman and the team behind 2011’s Thor being unable to make it work. Trank voiced his interest, and though Fox executives offered him the chance to pursue something original, the Marvel movie “felt like the most rebellious thing to do,” the director said. His take on the material made him confident. A company buying into his hype made him bullheaded. Fox didn’t want to make another Fantastic Four movie — it wanted to make Josh Trank’s Fantastic Four movie.

 

The movie was a multitiered bomb. On top of critical pans and a worldwide gross of $167 million, just a third of what the first Fantastic Four made 10 years earlier, the lead-up and fallout of the film saw Trank caught in behind-the-scenes drama. Insiders told The Hollywood Reporter at the time that the director had been erratic, reclusive, and absent-minded enough to allow his three dogs to do $100,000 worth of damage to the Louisiana home rented for the shoot. The first time I spoke to Trank, eight months after the release of Fantastic Four, he pushed back on the details in the report. His disposition was harder to defend. “There have been a lot of times when I’ve been told, ‘This is how you should handle this,’ and I handle it in a different way and it turns out in my favor,” he said. “And then there have also been times when I’ve been wrong, and it has only resulted in complete disaster.”