BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

F4 Silver Surfer Movie (spoilers & pics)

  
 
Quantum
13:04 / 17.06.07
Well, I went to see this last night hoping for good CGI and action, and I got what I expected, the surfer was really cool.
But. It was always going to be rubbish in almost every other aspect, wasn't it, acting, plot, script, costumes, characters etc. were as dreadful as I expected.

IT CAN BE SPOILER TIME NOW


...


The one thing I wanted to see was Galactus, there was even the shadow of his helmet on Saturn, but when it came down to it he was just a swirling cloud of rocks and dust, how rubbish. At one point I thought his face was going to come out of the cloud when the surfer confronts him, which would have been really cool, but no, he was just like a twister, and how come the surfer can destroy Galactus by just gritting his teeth and clapping his hands, considering all his power comes from the big G in the first place it's nonsense, and anyway isn't he fucking immortal and, oh, GALACTUS FFS, he doesn't even speak, what a wasted opportunity for a great cinematic moment.



*BASS HEAVY DOLBY SURROUND VOICE OF GALACTUS SAYS*

"FANTASTIC FOUR, RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER, YOU ARE MADE OF LAME"
 
 
FinderWolf
14:08 / 17.06.07
yeah, I hear this is just about as weak as the first one, if not moreso. I won't be rushing out to see it...it may be a DVD rental 6 months from now.
 
 
Spaniel
16:45 / 17.06.07
I really don't understand why they decided against having the big guy actually be a big guy. Sure it might've been difficult to take seriously but to my mind the an FF movie would work well in the same kind of comedy vein as Ghostbusters, scary and silly at the same time. I reckon a huge bloke with glowing purple eyes and the power to snuff out suns who wants to eat our planet would fit the bill perfectly.
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
18:00 / 17.06.07
Also, there really needs to be more true giants in cinema. We are significantly lacking in giants. Terry Gilliam made it work pretty well, I thought.

I almost went to see FF ROTSS when I heard a false report that Galactus actually surprise appears in the movie, but then that was proven to be wrong. Oh well. I, too, really wanted the true Galactus to be in this.
 
 
Seth
22:42 / 17.06.07
We are significantly lacking in giants.

Rather depends what you're watching. Some of us are inundated.
 
 
yawn - thing's buddy
23:04 / 17.06.07
went to see this last night - actually enjoyed it.

silver surfer was pretty creepy.

very creepy actually. pretty cosmic too though, got to be said. actually, very Jack Kirby, thinking about it.

I'd say go see it for the fuckin weirdness of the silver surfer alone.

plus johnny storm made it seem quite x-statix. which was nice.

quite enjoyed the super power transfer shenanigans as well - played like one of those early lee/kirby stories - the ones with a desperate hilarity about them. like when the thing regaining his human form again for a day - that kinda thang.kenwhitahmean?

s'not bad.

tho it's true that a galactu-glimpse would have made it not badder.
 
 
yawn - thing's buddy
23:06 / 17.06.07
ps. didn't see the first one.
 
 
Quantum
10:28 / 18.06.07
Sure it might've been difficult to take seriously Boboss

Compared to the ham'ncheese in the rest of the film though (Mr Fantastic's dance party, Dr Doom the everliving, the quarterback speech) a giant man in a purple hat would be pretty serious. If they can have orange rock dick jokes they can have Galactus.
 
 
penitentvandal
10:32 / 18.06.07
The Fantastic Dance was my favourite bit! It really underscores the basic dynamic of the FF, i.e. Reed IS the Dad, bad taste in suits and terrible dancing 'n' all.
 
 
deja_vroom
11:31 / 18.06.07
I saw the first one and thought it was the best comic book adaptation bar none ever (which means yes it was a pretty shitty movie, but at least harmless), so I was actually planning to see this one. Now that I know Galactus won't be there, though... I guess not.
 
 
Spaniel
11:50 / 18.06.07
which means yes it was a pretty shitty movie, but at least harmless

I happen to think at least a couple of comic adaptations are really rather good.
 
 
Mysterious Transfer Student
10:14 / 19.06.07
The Mighty Tharg's opinion - if I had no interest in seeing this movie before, I now have minus interest.
 
 
Kali, Queen of Kitteh
16:11 / 19.06.07
I went to see it opening day and enjoyed the hell out of it. I mean, yes, it's cheese, but it's hokey good fun cheese.

(And yes, I was disappointed by Galactus, too.)

Oh, how awesome it would be for everyone to enjoy a comics movie for once without any high expectations!
 
 
Gary Lactus
19:25 / 19.06.07
I also went to see this on the opening day and loved it. It was super lightweight and fun. It left me feeling that seeing it again would not be a rewarding experience but seeing lots more FF films would. I am totally down with sequals within the super hero genre, it feels truer to the text like that.

As the proud owner of my own Galactus helmet of course it was disapointing not to see him in all his weird cyber-loinclothed glory but I actually thought that cloud thing was pretty scarey. The scale of it! Earth looked tiny and fucked.

That is all.
 
 
Quantum
19:59 / 19.06.07
Fraely should have been cast in this movie. That would've been great.

best comic book adaptation bar none ever

Better than Sin City then?
 
 
The Falcon
21:14 / 19.06.07
Better than Ghost World? Better than Blade?!!!

(above italics for emphasis)

What rot. The first FF film is a pretty glossy, harmless affair that no-one in their right mind could conceivably watch twice - I always liked Cameron's(?) suggestion Wes Anderson should've scripted/directed the franchise if only because no-one would have watched them but I would have; I do think he would've at least captured the essential weirdness that was so glaringly absent from the first episode.
 
 
Mug Chum
22:56 / 19.06.07
I'm with the group that thinks that it'd be freaking awesome if a giant (Bruce Campbell?) 5000 times the size of Godzilla with a purple weird-ass hat (and some other "silly lame ass gay" outfit -- ok, you can make a blacker tone of metallic purple if it makes everybody feel better, I could live with that). Put some judgement day T2's drums of doom, and there you go. If you really need to do "end of the world = tsunami", make it that even his tiny moves cause them. You could even introduce him in silhouette in front of dying sucked stars in accelerated speed in the credits.

Films need more Kirby and his weird ass machineries and ideas. If you're not able to do Galactus, then why not remove the superhero factor entirely (including the cosmic silver space angel of doom on a surfboard, the rock-man, the flaming blondie, the invisible woman and the guy that can stretch himself) and make a SERIOUS! film and get Clint Eastwood to do kitchen sink art-house. And leave the "fantastic" at the door.

Haven't seen yet. But this development leaves me no desire to do so in the future.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
23:05 / 19.06.07
Blade 2, surely Falke? I'm not your enemy - why fight?
 
 
CameronStewart
04:11 / 20.06.07
>>>I always liked Cameron's(?) suggestion Wes Anderson should've scripted/directed the franchise<<<

Nope, that wasn't me. My dream FF movie would be a 1960s period piece, though, all groovy pop-art and mod fashions and ridiculous Kirby designs. I completely understand why they'll never do it, but it's still my dream.

I think that dismissing the purple spaceknight Galactus as too silly for film is idiotic and reveals only a fundamental lack of vision. Heidi MacDonald puts it best:

"Unfortunately since most of my brain was unengaged while watching the film, I was able to ponder other, more pertinent matters, like just what makes an Avi Arad movie. Producer Arad left Marvel last year, so he probably didn’t have his thumbprint on this as much as some of Marvel’s other movies, but the pattern is pretty clear. Since all of Marvel’s movies are based on corny 60s comics, these elements of corn have to be removed, lest they seem “unrealistic”; unfortunately they are replaced with 21st century corn. The result is just as silly as the old stuff but usually far less interesting.

The Spider-Man films are the most Autuer-istic superhero films out there — Sam Raimi is smart enough, as I’ve written here ad nauseum, to know that keeping the elements that made the comics great is not such a bad thing. Hence, Doc Ock’s wifebeater, Sandman’s striped shirt, Aunt May’s homilies, and Peter Parker’s attempts at keeping his grades up. Spidey 3 had the most Arad-introduced elements of any of the movies, and we all know how that turned out.

In FF, the original cheese has been stripped out. So it’s just Victor Von Doom, scientist and not…DOCTOR DOOM. Likewise, Galactus. I guess the idea of a big purple guy who went around eating planets was too silly, and would take people right out of the story, so here’s he’s replaced by a whirly cloud that would be at home in a 60s episode of STAR TREK.

The old embarrassing stuff is replaced by things like Johnny taking Reed to a dance club for his bachelor party and Reed breaking out with a stretchy dance. Yes, that’s not corny. Or Reed being so busy working on his super spy cam osciallator-o-tron that he forgets to go to his own wedding. Yes, yes, so believable! A guy in a purple suit would have ruined this verismo drama!"

More
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
04:50 / 20.06.07
I'm trying to wonder whether I enjoyed any of the Marvel films I've seen since X-2. Certainly the 'new seriousness' that Heidi identifies as being the fault of Avi Azad is why I didn't enjoy Spiderman 2, too often these films have missed out what made the comics enjoyable, X-2 worked because it was 'our family against the world!', X-3 didn't because it ignored this. As the Fantastic Four in a film can't cross over with Spiderman or the X-Men they should be having some huge level cosmic adventure.

Too many of the Marvel films seem to be just throwing the franchise up on a movie screen and being happy with any old crap. No-one seems to be trying to make a good film.
 
 
Imaginary Mongoose Solutions
05:00 / 20.06.07
I was always a bit disappointed that Peyton Reed's name got removes from the franchise early on. I think he, of anyone, may have delivered something like what Cam suggests.

This is my favourite review of F42, though.
 
 
Mistoffelees
07:59 / 20.06.07
Better than Ghost World? Better than Blade?!!!

And let´s not forget Oldboy, Road to Perdition, American Splendor and A History of Violence.

After having rented the first disappointing FF, renting the sequel doesn´t seem to be a good idea. No Galactus is a real deal breaker. I fondly remember the Walt Simonson storyline where Galactus turned into a giant black hole and ate up most of the universe and committed suicide with the ultimate nullifier. What a missed opportunity!

And the Surfer seemed so alienated in the trailer. Is he anything like his torn and melodramatic self in the movie?
 
 
Mug Chum
08:34 / 20.06.07
I haven't read spoilers for plot (if there's something to be spoiled), but I'm still baffled that they didn't make a visible-and-talking (with a voice that causes serious catastrophes) purple "space Godzi-Allah", and a "tortured-by-U.S. Silver Surfer that turns out to be the only one who can help us and we should make nice and friends with him if we wish to live" and a big brainless weird-ass brawl.

They should've channeled Kirby's ghost for art and design and called Buckaroo Banzai's director (and the writer to adapt the original comic and even add the ending Mistoffelees mentioned). That simple.

Is it true that the actors actually competed for bigger codpiece? That was a preoccupation? "Hold on, his makes it look like it could scratch his nipples!" -- "I'm fucking Strecher-Man, it's in character!" (Jessica Alba: "After this, if I get words put in my mouth in some internet forum by an asshole as if I'm a brainless hot pretty bimbo, I'll go galactus on their asses! Should've quit the fanboy circle after that geezer told me to dance as an underage cowgirl!")
(another reason to have Galactus. That motherfucker would kill that argument in a second and have people concerning about other things)
 
 
deja_vroom
13:24 / 20.06.07
Dear Der Falke, so sorry - of course I should have been more accurate: Best comic-book super-hero movie, I should have said. Ghost World is actually (considering my remark about good comic book movies being also shitty movie-movies) one of the best movies I've ever seen.
 
 
deja_vroom
01:22 / 21.06.07
I haven't read spoilers for plot (if there's something to be spoiled), but I'm still baffled that they didn't make a visible-and-talking (with a voice that causes serious catastrophes) purple "space Godzi-Allah", and a "tortured-by-U.S. Silver Surfer that turns out to be the only one who can help us and we should make nice and friends with him if we wish to live" and a big brainless weird-ass brawl.

They should've channeled Kirby's ghost for art and design and called Buckaroo Banzai's director (and the writer to adapt the original comic and even add the ending Mistoffelees mentioned). That simple.

Yes, crazy Kirby machinery. Steal from Steranko, too. Use stuff from "Marvels" issue 3#... This is what I'm talking about. Good ideas abound. But those movie people obviously are not... giving much thought to the production of super-hero movies. They're just like.. working there, or something? Do they hate their jobs and do it half-assedly, like I with mine?

Maybe someone with experience in executive administration could pipe in, but I think that when a movie's life "starts" from the prospect of an immediate commercial applicability, and this movie is seen as a vehicle for a range of products (I'm reminded of a recent newspaper ad where the F4 were advertising a car sale), it might get hard to convince the money people that it should be more than a 2 and a half-hour long commercial.

Which is where it gets tricky, because in a twisted way it's even harder to nail a good commercial movie[1] than a strictly authorial one because the latter can only be creatively hampered by - if any - concerns about its own marketability. But in the case of family-friendly super-hero movies with iconic characters, it would be crazy-silly to ignore the general advertising value of such an asset. It's kind of a let's not stir the shit attitude in which they churn out these flimsy attempts at storytelling because people are buying decorated plastic dishes anyway no matter if it's The Incredibles or the Shrek set. For the silly optimistic, it's also a shoot in the foot: A hot movie would be a far more efficient marketing virus than these lame-assed ones, wouldn't it?

Now I'm not interested in stirring the shit, so don't take my post as one of those "things were different when I was a kid and amn't I better than your regular customers" type of rants. I'm aware of the exceptions that prove the rule to everything I said. It's more like I'm , um, trying to fondle the zeitgeist for a pattern (yes, the pattern for why there are so many silly, shitty movies).

------
[1]faute de mieux. Genre movies also come to mind, to an extent. In the horror camp, for instance, "Rosemary's Baby" pretty damn well transcends its niche, and it's just a very good movie.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
05:17 / 21.06.07
Do they hate their jobs and do it half-assedly, like I with mine?

They may hate their jobs, but it is also possible that they want to keep them, as somebody proposing hiring the ghost of Jack Kirby probably would not.
 
 
Mug Chum
06:16 / 21.06.07
I just think the film should be shameless, weird, huge and fun (hmm), instead of unintentionally silly in it's self-consciously hold-back & cornyness and boring as I've been reading about the 2 and what I thought about the 1st. I would hate anything in an authorial vein for such project, just go with epic silly cosmic comercial cheese and the tingling feeling I had at the back of my head as a kid when ID4's ships arrived at Earth. It's a special effect-orama; the commercial aspect is pretty much implied, no? I sure as hell wouldn't like Wes Anderson in this film one bit.

I seriously doubt these people hate their jobs. I could stretch the imagination to think of a lack of love or (maybe more important than "love") even a lack of fun in doing them, perhaps (can anyone imagine Doom's actor having personal or professional glee underneath that face?). But... is that really an issue at all?

I seriously doubt that the cast of Spidey2, X-2 and BB had a bunch of fun and pure idealistic love and keeping their vision intact; it's business. It's just that some know how to dance better between their [some, lack of] love and biz. I just think some of these movies, in the long run, are bad for business.

PS: I seriously hope for everyone's sake that the Kirby's ghost reference wasn't taken literally. Just meant "take what you've got of the guy's designs and art and go crazy building on them as abstract conceptual basis"....... ya bunch of no-metaphors schizophrenics! (or are there people in the Temple that, you know...?) And far from me trying to give ideas or role-play film-choices, just shooting off steam trying to understand the edges around the creative choices and daydreaming with cheesy FF Buckaroo and what these characters -- that I don't find much attractive -- mean.

(sorry for mess; sleepy...)
 
 
deja_vroom
11:14 / 21.06.07
I seriously doubt these people hate their jobs. I could stretch the imagination to think of a lack of love or (maybe more important than "love") even a lack of fun in doing them, perhaps (can anyone imagine Doom's actor having personal or professional glee underneath that face?).

>>>> But... is that really an issue at all? <<<<

(...)

PS: I seriously hope for everyone's sake that the Kirby's ghost reference wasn't taken literally.

Well, and *I* hope my observation about movie execs "not loving their jobs" wasn't taken as the main point of my argument. As a commentary, it's pretty ancillary to the issue at hand, and it's there just as a rhetorical device illustrating my exasperation - even if I *do* think that love for what you're doing plays a great part in how much pressure you will take or how much hard thinking you're willing to do for its sake...
 
 
_pin
19:21 / 21.06.07
My s/o, who really doesn't care about any of this, saw this to take hir mind of real things. Upon being shown a picture of Galacatus, ze declared - to repeat, ze being a completely comicless individual who gave money to the people who financed this film with no love in hir heart for ol' Big up there - "why didn't he look like that?"

I can only assume that, if people who don't give a fuck before they see this movie about anything in this movie, and come out of it feeling robbed about Galactus, that the only reason he wasn't in it properly is beause no one could work out how he would actually eat a planet with a mouth like a human. Has this been documented? Does he sweep the people up? Stick a straw in there and suck? Bite like an apple?

Also, making drill holes, etc. at least explains just what the Surfer would be doing for eight whole goddamn days.

In other news, the film actually no longer contains the word "Fantastic" in its title. So where does the Surfer go next?
 
 
grant
20:00 / 21.06.07
Has this been documented? Does he sweep the people up? Stick a straw in there and suck? Bite like an apple?

I have a memory of a planet being reduced to energy (squozen inside one of his ships, maybe, after being broken into rubble by BEAMS OF LIGHT) and then absorbed by Galactus. I don't know where this memory comes from.
 
 
Mug Chum
05:34 / 22.06.07
Sorry Deja, I really sounded like a dick earlier (I was sleepy and could only think "fodder for a new thread").

But I also meant I'm unsure about the execs (or the overall general thinking of "we're doing canned goods here") as escape goats; I mean, if even Bruckheimer and Disney can let Verbinski on a relatively loose leach to do his job and execs are able to get (and work with) "cult" Raimi, Singer and Nolan for mega-franchises, and see that treating these films as not only canned goods does increases the prospect for more money, doesn't seems to be anymore to be the stupid version of greed, but the smart one, positively creative... I'm thinking that "money talks" alone doesn't frame all that well. I think in case of FF, Elektra, DD or Ghost Rider... maybe, it's just "shit happens" (and I'm sure many of them don't even think of it as shit, since they did get it's money, and they're... well, I wouldn't call wrong)

Just might be as simple as lack of talent from writers, or directors or editors (maybe actors) or just, like you said, lack of passion (or geek love), lack of grasping the material and just wanting to stay on the boat since, well, it's a mega-million blockbuster project. (I mean, it is the director of "Taxi" -- but at the same time, the director of "Barbershop")

And well, it's top 1 on box-office, I'm not even sure we hold any place whatsoever in judging them in any way. I just feel, for instance, a third movie won't hold much water and ultimately it's bad for movies and comics (I keep getting in my head Batman Forever -- that I love -- and Batman&Robin and the lack of superhero movies afterwards and the brand as the pattern here)

(But I think a new thread on comics, comics industry, movies, box-office, creation process and overall business might be welcomed, specially by those that are pissed while reading my thread-rot words now)
 
  
Add Your Reply