Fantastic Four - A study into Hollywood and a fanbase

Fantastic Four - A study into Hollywood and a fanbase

A look into this film and to truly see why it failed, as well as an analysis into the reaction of the fanbase.

Editorial Opinion
By HenshinRider - Aug 16, 2015 10:08 PM EST
Filed Under: Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four is a film that has received a lot of negative press as of late. Be it stories of the tumultuous and troubled production or even just general negative reviews, it is fun to hate on the new film. The question though, is it fair? Is really deserving a 9% on Rotten Tomatoes? There is no point in trying to hide the fact that the movie is flawed. Yes, shock and horror the film is bad. My question is, “Is it really that bad?” My answer to that is no, it’s not. The film is fundamentally flawed and is undoubtedly one of the structurally worst stories I have ever witnessed on film – but I feel as if people are rallying for this film to be hung and quartered for other reasons.

Fantastic Four is more than just bad film, it has transcended being just a film. It is the vindication of an entire fanbase that have foretold the film’s failure for the last year. Finally, a film that the fanbase believed would be a disaster turned into a disaster. Not only just a disaster but a universal flop. Millions of fans feeling vindicated have sung up and jumped on saying “see we are right! We know what we are talking about!” The problem is, they don’t – or at least not for the right reasons.

The film has turned into a symbol for the fanbase as proof that they know better than Hollywood. I am here to tell you that no – the truth is you really don’t. The problem is that most of the vocal fanbase can’t tell you why the film is bad, they will just smugly respond with – ofcourse it failed, they bastardised and shat on the source material. This is the same audience that probably has never read a comic book outside of early childhood and only exposure to Fantastic Four is external media and Wikipedia articles. As a fan of Fantastic Four and having read it I can tell you – Fantastic Four is stupid. In fact something everyone should know is that comic books are stupid. But that is why they are awesome, because they are stupid and make no sense and don’t have to. The problem is a film can’t just be stupid and still work (well it can, but rarely are those films a financial success). So for a comic book to be translated to film there already has to be an element of adaptation to make story points cleaner. As much shit as I give Fantastic Four: Rise of Silver Surfer for its usage of Galactus, a giant man in a pink suit eating planets would’ve been laughed off the screens. So I can tell the fanbase right now that being closer to the comics does not make a successful film. So why did Fantastic Four fail? I think I have the answer.

You see, the problem with Fantastic Four has got to do with the structure of the film. Through watching the film I found myself actually enjoying the origin of all the characters. It falls apart at the end after the gang are given their powers. The issue is that the film does not have a second act. For those that aren’t film buffs let me explain the three act structure.

Films usually work best when they are applied to a three act structure; beginning, middle and end. Act 1 is the set-up of the film, it is here we establish characters, their needs and wants – we also establish what our protagonist(s) goal is and why we want them to achieve it. Act 2 is the action of the film – it is the journey our protagonist(s) go through to achieve their goal. Act 3 is the climax and resolution, all the plot points converge and our protagonist(s) must overcome evil and by the end have a character arc having changed by their journey. Fantastic Four doesn’t have the journey. The film gives us the set up then the climax and resolution. The film even has character’s go through a change, but the problem is we don’t see them dealing with their flaws that lead the characters to the change.

The fallout from this film hasn’t been very pretty and although I don’t like to throw blame around, I think I do blame Fox the most. That is not to say that the blame isn’t shared among all parties – everyone in charge of this production should be held accountable. Let’s keep in mind that no one wanted to make a bad film, everyone came in with the best intentions. The reason I blame Fox slightly more than Trank or Kinberg is that Fox gave the script and visions a green light and then asking for changes when it didn’t fit what they thought a summer blockbuster should be. Fox, if you wanted a summer blockbuster then you should’ve Okayed a summer blockbuster. That being said – you also need to see it through Fox’s perspective, they were running close on losing the rights and they needed to quickly get it done. Josh Trank on the other hand (behind the scenes stories aside) has been acting unprofessionally playing the blame game. Where Fox has bent over backwards to sweep these stories under the rug – Trank is just stoking the fire. My personal two cents on what happened? Josh Trank had an interesting idea that Fox wanted to go with - it deviated from the original concept but it was fresh and different. After the plot leaked online and seeing the negative fan reaction, Fox tried to 'fix' it by making it as Marvel as they could - only they managed the exact opposite.

So here’s a little perspective to think when you laugh or hate on this movie. This movie will cost Fox – there won’t be much profit. Josh Trank has pretty much destroyed his career, the man will never ever work for Hollywood again. All we got was a bad movie that we can ignore. I think we got off pretty easily all things considered.


If you liked this article click that red glove as well as a Facebook share or even a tweet. If you want to see more of my stuff go to my brand spanking new website: www.Theunemployedwriter.com. At that website you'll find a few new articles and I plan to release many articles on the site that are not here. Also feel free to like my Facebook page for regular updates at www.facebook.com/theunemployedwriter. So that is enough shilling for one day - have a great day everyone!
Latest THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS Set Photos Reveal Closer Look At Joseph Quinn's Johnny Storm Wig
Related:

Latest THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS Set Photos Reveal Closer Look At Joseph Quinn's Johnny Storm Wig

THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS Set Photos Reveal A New Look At Pedro Pascal's Mister Fantastic
Recommended For You:

THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS Set Photos Reveal A New Look At Pedro Pascal's Mister Fantastic

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

SummersClan
SummersClan - 8/16/2015, 11:23 PM
Alot I have to disagree with in this article.

1. You make it seem this film getting panned is just the fanboys venting, when in reality, the general audience and critics are panning it for failing at being a movie, period. It flopping was also a result of the marketing making it look unappealing, so the film really needed to be a critical hit, which it didn't achieve. Thus flopped.

2. Its true, comics are stupid, and guess what, GA have embraced that, or did you forget the film with a talking raccoon outgrossed frickin Spiderman last year? I'm all for making some necessary changes from comics to screen, like Bucky being Cap's old friend/comrade in arms, rather than his young protegé/sidekick. And then there's turning the ever loving, blue eyed Thing into a quiet, depressed weapon for the military with no genitals. The point is, this film stripped all the lovable elements from the comics/external media that people liked about the characters.

3. You want us to try and understand Fox's and Trank's position, and intentions, but why? Fox went about this whole thing completely wrong. They announce a reboot to FF around the same time as Disney bought Marvel, and sat on it t'ill the last minute. They hired an inexperienced director in Josh Trank, who wasn't interested in making a FF film, and opted to make a film with vague ties to his previous film, Chronicle. Fox wanted to make a FF film as cheap as possible, and had no grand plan or ideas, just wanted something cheap enough to hold onto the rights for longer. The production can be summed up in 4 words, disorganization, arrogance, desperation, and greed.
HenshinRider
HenshinRider - 8/17/2015, 12:23 AM
@SteveRogers9

I think you may have misunderstood the intention of my article. I actually agree with everything you just said. I only decided to highlight the hyperbolic nature of people's reaction. My main point is that fan boys mainly complain about how it is bad because it wasn't true to the source material - which is simply not true. The reason it is bad is because the film is fundamentally flawed from a story telling and structural stand point. All I am saying is that although something is different and changed from the source material doesn't automatically make it bad. I adore the fact that GOTG embraced how comics are stupid and just ran with it - but not everyone's James Gunn and not everyone can pull that off.
SummersClan
SummersClan - 8/17/2015, 1:23 AM
@HenshinRider

Well I did say there's nothing wrong with making necessary changes to the comics, but there's a point where you are blatantly alienating the source material, which this film achieved.

As for whether it deserves the negative buzz, you yourself argue it doesn't, claiming it is the fanboys exaggerating the film's awfulness, when it is the GA that is panning it as well. Perhaps its not what you meant, but that is what it read like.
HenshinRider
HenshinRider - 8/17/2015, 1:36 AM
@SteveRogers9

It isn't just the fanboys that dislike it, it is the general audience, it is only the fanboys that think that it's cos they deviated from the source material. The general audience hates this movie too - and for good reason. I am of the opinion that if a movie still has the essence of what makes the character work, then it still works as an adaptation. Take the Nolan trilogy for example, those films are very different from the comics - but the essence of Batman is still there. I honestly think if Batman Begins came out in this climate then it would have received a lot more vitriol and hate - hell I even see it being retroactively applied now and again.
kong
kong - 8/17/2015, 6:15 AM
I hate fanboys (*cough*@steverogers9*cough*) who think that changing the source material makes a movie bad! News flash, it never does! No comic book movie EVER took a dive in quality because they didn't stay true to the comics. These are adaptions!!! Changing a story, unless the changes are actually bad and not just disappointing because your a blind and idiotic fanboy, that was first told in a different medium does not make the film bad. It's just stupid fanboys that think it does.

And it doesn't matter what they "stripped away" because no one cares outside fans! And the people who read F4 comics only take up 1% of the moviegoing audience. The GA only wants a good movie. A film where Spider-Man got his powers from a magical wizard in the "Arachnid Occult" and fights the Green Goblin, a gargoyle that comes to life when covered with magical green paint could get Best Picture. And no one would care if fanboys shit themselves through their tiny ass dicks anyway.
SummersClan
SummersClan - 8/17/2015, 6:24 AM
@Kong

Instead of reading my comment, you picked out one part of it you didn't like, and went on a defensive rant. Where was it I said everything in the source should be the same? I even say I'm ok with making NECESSARY changes. However change for the sake of it is pointless, and serves to distance it from the material they are basing it off of.

Why do you think studios are adapting known franchises instead of making original content? Because they want to tap into a core audience, and expand/make changes to bring in more viewers.

Besides, the changing of the source was the least of my troubles. The biggest one I have is Fox blatant disregard for the FF, and half ass attempt to craft a movie. True to source aside, that is the major take away, and why the film failed.
Bloodthroe
Bloodthroe - 8/17/2015, 6:27 AM
What a pointless article. It was created just to say, "Yeah, the movie is terrible, but the people who hated on it were still wrong."

What a petty attack from a Fox fan who is too stubborn to admit he was wrong about a train-wreck that many other people saw coming a mile away.

Comicbookmovie.com, you got some shitty authors. I only come here when someone links to you in the forums I frequent.
BawbScharf
BawbScharf - 8/17/2015, 7:28 AM
Wow ...just wow. The people on this site really are too stupid to comprehend fair and balanced points presented in an organized and well thought out manner.

Do I agree with all of his points? No, but to write it off as pointless is the act of someone who either didn't read the article or didn't understand it. Was he super pretentious? Yes, but sometimes you really have to be with fans who share a mob-mentality. Also, I usually end up telling people to take a critical thinking course in my comments thus I am guilty of the same thing. With that said, some of the people commenting here REALLY need to take a college level critical thinking course.

What I will knock the author on is his subject. While the argument is presented in a concise and entertaining manner, everyone is writing about the F4. While his is the best article on the movie, it follows a herd group think of only posting FF articles until the next major shake up in CBM's happen. The article could get lost in the shuffle just due to that; worse, it will attract those who do not comprehend thoroughly reading an argument and they will label you a fan boy for Fox. I think it would stand out, with the same points, if you made it broader in general towards CBM's as a whole with FF as an example but not the whole of your stance.

But still, it is a pity that such a well written article is getting panned when it should be going to the main page. Good work.
PeterDarker121
PeterDarker121 - 8/17/2015, 7:42 AM
The article has a GREAT premise but like the film you ignore the elephant in the room.... and that's the frauds who claimed this film would be a bomb from the get go are saying "I told you so" because Michael B Jordan was cast as Johnny Storm and nothing more. Check out the comment sections of 'Yahoo' and other news aggregate sites reporting on the failure of this movie over the last week and a half and you'll see what I mean.

And I GET your comment about comic books being "stupid", but you need to refine that comment. I'm guessing what you MEAN to say is that the 'comic book' in and of itself has the literary freedom to explore more.....FANTASTICAL elements of the subject matter. Now whether those elements can be successfully translated to celluloid without tittering from the audience is another story.

Along with most of the fan base, I couldn't BELIEVE a damn CLOUD was made to be GALACTUS in 'Rise of the Silver Surfer.' But over the years, I've thought about this decision and long story short, I realize that in the end, this was the best decision for the studio adaptation. Fox wasn't trying to do anything NEAR the glory of the original Galactus Trilogy and for general audiences who have no clue about that masterpiece, it worked for 'Galactus' to be some nebulous, Hollywood cloud of unimaginable dread from which Norrin Radd was attempting to save the planet. Throwing in a two story tall dude with a metal space rave outfit trying to build a device so he could siphon...Ultimate Nullifier..Rings of Un-Life...

....you get my drift.

That being said, that says nothing of THIS FF which suffered more from plain bad Filmmaking 101 than anything as you rightfully point out. Yes, there was a massive collective JOLT for about a month or so when Trank decided from the getgo that Sue was the adopted sister of a Black Storm family...but I believe in my heart of hearts that most comic fans GOT that this was a take on what the FF was about in the FIRST place...An adaptation of a modern family thrown into fantastic circumstances. Too bad something....a LOT of 'THINGS'.....got lost in the translation.
PeterDarker121
PeterDarker121 - 8/17/2015, 7:44 AM
By the way, I gave you a thumbs up because I think you hit a lot of points on the mark but this is an article STILL in its 3rd or 4th phase but not ready for Prime Time.
WYLEEJAY
WYLEEJAY - 8/17/2015, 12:56 PM
I have a hard time with articles like this. You make good points, and then it spirals into opinion territory and I lose interest. If I knew it was just you thinking your opinion is right and other people's are wrong, I would have probably skipped it altogether. Instead I came here thinking I was gonna read something that would really make me think. I will give you a thumb for your effort. I'm just getting worn out on articles like this. It's right up there with the "What this studio NEEDS to do with so and so to be successful" type articles I see all the time. Who the hell are they to tell a studio what they NEED to do?

Just word it differently next time I guess...
kong
kong - 8/17/2015, 6:01 PM
@SteveRogers9

The entire comment wasn't directed to you. Just the one sentence that was.

Reasonnnn
Reasonnnn - 8/18/2015, 12:45 AM
Very fair and well written article. I look forward to your future editorials/reviews/etc. :)

Also, why male models?
SummersClan
SummersClan - 8/18/2015, 5:42 AM
@Kong

You lumped me into a group who thinks changing the source material even a little is bad.

kong
kong - 8/18/2015, 7:09 AM
@SteveRogers9

"And then there's turning the ever loving, blue eyed Thing into a quiet, depressed weapon for the military with no genitals. The point is, this film stripped all the lovable elements from the comics/external media that people liked about the characters.


You started tripping over the dick of a character you wouldn't have seen anyway, and blue eyes. If that's not a dumbass fanboy tendency I don't know what is.

Especially when he did have blue eyes. And Thing has ALWAYS been depressed about his powers in EVERY telling of the origin story. He's the only member of the F4 Reed has constantly tried to "cure" over their entire comic book history.

Another example of fanboys who try to defend something they're not even really fans of.
View Recorder