Reviews by Title:  0-9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z
Reviews by Year:  2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006
Reviews by Rating:  0 star | 0.5 star | 1 star | 1.5 star | 2 star | 2.5 star | 3 star | 3.5 star | 4 star | 4.5 star | 5 star


Day And Time:
Number of Reviews on MG:1525
Fantastic Four (2005)

Visitor Comments

Re: Fantastic Four (2005)
Added by adam dolce (email) on 2005-07-09 11:42:13

no offense, but i would think as a film critic you should first have at least a semblance of comic-book understanding before you critique a movie of said comic-book calibur.

in other words: you dont have any idea what youre talking about, do you?

generally origin movies suck balls, but certain movies do in fact nail it (e.g. batman begins, fantastic four). you mentioned spider-man, but i believe you are bunching both together (if you recall, the first spider-man (origin movie) had extremely horrible writing, yet the second spider-man was praised for it's screenplay-spider-man 1 definitely did not balance anything out). fantastic four, surprisingly, was a movie that really adhered to the comic books (for starters: doom going to latveria; the invisible girl having internal bleeding upon using force fields; reed richards not shaving when he is really busy working; ben grimm as the thing getting a new girlfriend (she was white in the comics). the only real problem was doom having powers. but eh, that's cool.

so here's the way i can see it: you're probably the type of person who thinks tim burton did wonders for the batman movies, whilst overlooking the fact that tim burton really screwed over batman's origins. (1) batman killed the joker, but that is not in batman's credo and 2) batman does not rely on gadgets-he is a fighter. i bring up batman to underline the fact that comic-book movies can either be popular art directed towards a mass audience thus establishing it as a money-maker, or you can have a comic-book movie that actually wants to "get it right".

this comment doesnt make sense in some parts, but ill close with a few words: your review sucks ass. good day, sir.




Re: Fantastic Four (2005)
Added by John   on 2005-07-13 11:11:38

Why do comic fanboys hate Tim Burton so much because he "ruined" Batman? He presented his own twist on it, just as Frank Miller did. Sure, it was style over substance, but it was good style. "Batman" isn't a great film but it's an entertaining one. It seems every time a critic gives a comic book movie a bad rating the fans say, "Let me guess, you liked Tim Burton's version..." Weak argument.

As for "Fantastic Four"... I thought the trailer looked incredibly childish and the film unappealing; in addition it stars Michael Chiklis (sp?) as The Thing, who proved with Wired (1989), a film based on the life and death of John Belushi (based on a novel by Woodward), he could hardly act... I don't know if sixteen years have done anything but I'm not rushing out to see it anytime soon.

In fact the only thing I had the slightest interest in, in regards to "Fantastic Four," was of course Jessica Alba (always a good thing for any film when she doesn't have to speak any lines), and the new Velvet Revolver song "Come On Come In"...but I don't need to sit through a movie like this for either of those things. I'm kind of disappointed in VR, this is the second time they've been involved in a stinky comic book adaptation soundtrack... they should try a good film next time.




Add new comment

Name:
E-mail:
Website:
Comment Title:
Comment:
All comments are owned by their posters.

Please e-mail abuse@movie-gurus.com with complaints.


Copyright © 2003-2017 Movie-Gurus.com.   All rights reserved.