Reviews For FANTASTIC FOUR Are In

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull Of course he quit. Because Marvel interfered. Just like how Fox interfered with Josh Trank's Fantastic Four. Only difference is, Josh Trank stayed.

I never said Marvel hasn't done it. You argued for how it's part of Trank's own fault because "Marvel doesn't use the directors' visions and still makes decent enough movies, so if they can do it so can Fawks and Trunky". Well, those movies would've been ten times greater had the directors visions not been inteferred, making your entire argument irrelevant.

Also, Trank HAD to stay as he was already into the production-phase. Quitting at that point would be a career suicide. Wright hadn't even begun making it when the scripts were re-written.

Mecha wrote:

@yonny616 It isn't just Ant-Man though. Edward Norton had an idea for the story of The Incredible Hulk and Marvel agreed to it, so Edward Norton helped wrote the script. But then later, Marvel decided to change things and Edward Norton was upset that Marvel didn't stick to their agreement. Alan Taylor even admitted that Thor: The Dark World didn't turned out as he was promised. Hell, even Joss Whedon hinted Marvel's interference over The Avengers: Age of Ultron.

Except that Ant-Man seemed like the only one that they would have gone through with. Marvel changed Incredible Hulk because Norton's stuff was too dark for them and they went with Zak Penn's original script. Norton was pissed and Marvel made Norton out as the bad guy. The difference is The Dark World wasn't Alan Taylor's idea, Marvel's writers wrote the film, and Taylor was honestly just a guy they hired to direct it on set. As for Age of Ultron the movie was apparently too long. By this I mean they wouldn't get all the screenings possible. They told Joss Whedon to pick one, Thor's vision or Hawkeyes useless farm, to cut it down. They didn't come in and reshoot and rewrite half of the film at the last minute because they got cold feet.

@RamboOnRedBull All I'm saying is, it's both Fox and Josh Trank's fault. Not just Fox. But because Josh Trank is acting like the victim, we should just give him an easy pass? I'm sorry, the film may suck, but it's very unprofessional to trash your own movie when you should be promoting it among with the actors during this time.

@yonny616 I still fail to see how Marvel is any better than Fox? Okay, MAYBE the Alan Taylor thing doesn't count. With the whole situation with Edward Norton is really now different. As for cutting time, Josh Trank planned on making his version longer as well. Just like how Joss Whedon wanted Avengers: Age of Ultron to be longer.

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull All I'm saying is, it's both Fox and Josh Trank's fault. Not just Fox. But because Josh Trank is acting like the victim, we should just give him an easy pass? I'm sorry, the film may suck, but it's very unprofessional to trash your own movie when you should be promoting it among with the actors during this time.

He IS the victim. Fox screwed him over after making a longtime-contract based on their agreement. Trank had no choice but to follow through on it, or risk being millions in debt. 

It is unprofessional to trash a movie that hundreds of people worked on, but that doesn't make the situation that ended up happening as partly his fault when he had no say over it, in the first place.

Okay, you know what? Whenever a movie turns out bad, lets just all blame it at the studio. Because you know, directors aren't responsible for the quality of the movie at all.

The director isn't responsible for what the studio force upon him.

Also:

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/fantastic-four-box-office-1201559054/

Quote :

Fox’s “Fantastic Four” faces an uphill climb at the box office following savage reviews and controversy, picking up $2.7 million from 2,900 Thursday night locations.

Easy 500 million right there, for sure.

@RamboOnRedBull Oh but if it turned out to be a good movie, then you would quickly give all the credit to Josh Trank instead of Fox. What a load of shit, man.

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull Oh but if it turned out to be a good movie, then you would quickly give all the credit to Josh Trank instead of Fox. What a load of shit, man.

If it turned out to be a good movie and they admitted Fox was the one that changed into that vision, I wouldn't give Trank the praise. You need to learn how to argue for something instead of jumping from point-to-point like an idiot.

@RamboOnRedBull There is no way of knowing if Josh Trank's vision would have been better. You guys are just so gullible to believe him.

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull All I'm saying is, it's both Fox and Josh Trank's fault. Not just Fox. But because Josh Trank is acting like the victim, we should just give him an easy pass? I'm sorry, the film may suck, but it's very unprofessional to trash your own movie when you should be promoting it among with the actors during this time.

@yonny616 I still fail to see how Marvel is any better than Fox? Okay, MAYBE the Alan Taylor thing doesn't count. With the whole situation with Edward Norton is really now different. As for cutting time, Josh Trank planned on making his version longer as well. Just like how Joss Whedon wanted Avengers: Age of Ultron to be longer.

Because even though Marvel has interfered, Marvel has yet to actually screw over their creative talent as bad as Fox has. Yes, but they didn't take whatever script Whedon has for Avengers, rewrite half of it and make him reshoot half of the movie. Like I said, this is why many people who have seen the film are saying that it feels like two different films and that the reshoots are mostly evident in the final half of the film which is what tears the whole thing down.

Lmao I bet if this was Marvel you'd be all over it saying "this is the problem with Marvel" and all that crap.

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull There is no way of knowing if Josh Trank's vision would have been better. You guys are just so gullible to believe him.

There's also no way of knowing that his vision was even worse. The world isn't black and white, Mecha.

@yonny616 It's a problem for EVERY studio. That's the point. But Marvel gets an easy pass every time they interfere. Sure, it may seem worse when Fox does it. But that's because they made a bad film. Also, Josh Trank screwed himself over. No one told him to make that comment on Twitter. The fact that he's acting so unprofessional about it, make everything that he said questionable.

@RamboOnRedBull Never said his vision was probably worse. But obviously Fox wasn't happy with the results that he made, so they decided to do reshoots. Yet you guys are defending him. All I'm saying is that it's both of their faults. I'm not defending Fox like you guys are with Trank. I'm saying BOTH. Oh but you guys are just assuming that Trank's vision was probably going to be better because he made Chronicle? So? Fox is the same studio that put out X-Men: Days of Future Past last year. Don't know what makes Trank's comment more valid than Fox?

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull Never said his vision was probably worse. But obviously Fox wasn't happy with the results that he made, so they decided to do reshoots. Yet you guys are defending him. All I'm saying is that it's both of their faults. I'm not defending Fox like you guys are with Trank. I'm saying BOTH. Oh but you guys are just assuming that Trank's vision was probably going to be better because he made Chronicle? So? Fox is the same studio that put out X-Men: Days of Future Past last year. Don't know what makes Trank's comment more valid than Fox?

Studios don't interfere mid-way through production due to quality since they already know everything about the quality before they even greenlit it.

No-one ever said we think his vision would be better due to Chronicle, Mecha, so stop being so judgemental. In fact, I never said, nor even mentioned, anything about his vision being better or worse. YOU did.  

Fox did X-Men: DoFP? So what? DoFP wasn't made the way it was because of Fox, but because of Bryan Singer being allowed to use the vision they agreed. Worst example you could've used.

@RamboOnRedBull What are you talking about? Marvel does reshoots all the time.

Maybe because Bryan Singer is an actual GOOD director? Like I said before, when Hollywood puts out a good movie, people give all the credit to the director. When they put out a bad movie, people quickly blame the studio.

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull What are you talking about? Marvel does reshoots all the time.

Maybe because Bryan Singer is an actual GOOD director? Like I said before, when Hollywood puts out a good movie, people give all the credit to the director. When they put out a bad movie, people quickly blame the studio.

Re-shoots are not the same as interfereing a directors vision mid-way through...

Mecha, it's THAT way with EVERY MOVIE - Hollywood or not. When Directors do a good movie, they get the credit. That's how it is with EVERY Film in existence. You seriously know NOTHING about ANYTHING that you're trying to argue on.

@RamboOnRedBull What are you talking about? Don't misunderstand things and point at me like I'm the idiot. As far as I know, Trank was trying to make Chronicle 2 with the Fantastic Four. Fox didn't like the results and decided to do reshoots.

Oh but when there's a bad movie we got to blame the studio and not the director? Give me a break.

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull What are you talking about? Don't misunderstand things and point at me like I'm the idiot. As far as I know, Trank was trying to make Chronicle 2 with the Fantastic Four. Fox didn't like the results and decided to do reshoots.

Oh but when there's a bad movie we got to blame the studio and not the director? Give me a break.

Fox already KNEW exactly what Trank wanted to do. Their main concern was that it wouldn't have as big of a market as certain other movies. You can see it through the exposition, through the constant build-up to a bigger universe, through the cartoony-delivered villain who doesn't fit Trank's vision. They didnt't mind the results - they just wanted a slice of Marvel's success. Fox didn't just do re-shoots, they changed the entire approach that Trank wanted mid-way through. Re-shoots are only a minor part of it.

When did I ever blame a bad movie on a studio? Your comment there is completely out-of-place and has nothing to do with anything I've ever said. But funny to see it coming from the guy who blamed studios for Alien 3 when Fincher had proven nothing and had no experience in feature-films, but then gets turned into a crybaby when Trank had already proven he's got talented and is a good director. Nice going, hypocrite.

Fantastic Flop!



Still think it's going to make $500 million, Yonny?

@RamboOnRedBull Why are you ignoring all of the reports of Trank's behavior on the set, yet bring up all the rumors of what Fox has done?

You seem to be implying that it's the studio's fault by defending Trank as if he didn't do anything. You can't even accept the possibility that he also goof'd as well. He only made ONE good movie. It could be a fluke for all we know. By the way, you're calling me a cry baby when the guy you're defending is trashing his own movie on Twitter while all of the actors are promoting it. So yeah...

Mecha wrote:

@yonny616 It's a problem for EVERY studio. That's the point. But Marvel gets an easy pass every time they interfere. Sure, it may seem worse when Fox does it. But that's because they made a bad film. Also, Josh Trank screwed himself over. No one told him to make that comment on Twitter. The fact that he's acting so unprofessional about it, make everything that he said questionable.

Did I say it wasn't? Probably because their films usually turn out as the usual average Marvel films. Yes, it is worse because they had something. They had something there, got cold feet and changed way too much. Fox screwed Trank. That's hilarious, because, like I said, if this was a Marvel Studios film you would be all over it talking shit and blaming Marvel. So? He expressed his frustrations about something he spent months working on. Should Alan Taylor shut up that Marvel took the film off his hands in post production? No.

As for the 500 million thing, you still haven't figured out what optimistic means? And no. Once the film dropped to Batman & Robin's level of critics rating I stopped believing this thing will even make it past 200 million.

@yonny616 Maybe Fox got cold feet and changed too much because Josh Trank's cut sucks? As for me blaming Marvel if they did the same, it all depends on the situation. I mean, I might contradict myself by saying this, but all Marvel does is hire D-list directors now because they are easier to control. So I don't care if Marvel interferes or not anymore. Because I consider Kevin Feige the real mastermind of these movies. Marvel directors get way too much credit. I mean, you're going to sit there and tell me the directors of You, Me and Dupree just happened to make a good film because they are that talented? Bull! They are just following Kevin Feige's direction and have extra help on the set. But anyway, whether Fox interfered or not, that doesn't give him the right to trash the film when the studio is promoting it. There has been a lot of people who worked hard on this movie, and he's going to ruin it for everyone just because his vision didn't come to life? Oh boo hoo. Even IF Josh Trank is the victim, there is NO excuse for being a douche by posting that comment on Twitter.


So you admit that I was right about it not making $500 million then?

Mecha wrote:

Maybe Fox got cold feet and changed too much because Josh Trank's cut sucks? As for me blaming Marvel if they did the same, it all depends on the situation. I mean, I might contradict myself by saying this, but all Marvel does is hire D-list directors now because they are easier to control. So I don't care if Marvel interferes or not anymore. Because I consider Kevin Feige the real mastermind of these movies. Marvel directors get way too much credit. I mean, you're going to sit there and tell me the directors of You, Me and Dupree just happened to make a good film because they are that talented? Bull! They are just following Kevin Feige's direction and have extra help on the set. But anyway, whether Fox interfered or not, that doesn't give him the right to trash the film when the studio is promoting it. There has been a lot of people who worked hard on this movie, and he's going to ruin it for everyone just because his vision didn't come to life? Oh boo hoo. Even IF Josh Trank is the victim, there is NO excuse for being a douche by posting that comment on Twitter.


So you admit that I was right about it not making $500 million then?

Except that Josh Trank's cut never happened because it was changed. No it wouldn't. You be here bickering and blaming Marvel. Kind of like what Fox did, only this "d-list" director bit back in the end. Sure. It doesn't take much to make you go on a Marvel tirade. He can do whatever the hell he wants. Lol "Douche". He isn't being a douche, he's just expressed his frustrations about how his film was high-jacked by the studio. You would too if you and a studio agreed on something only for the studio to shit on you and change.

No, because I never said that's what it will make.

@yonny616 If it was never changed, then wouldn't it defeat the purpose of calling it reshoots? What the hell are you talking about? I hated Iron Man 3, but I didn't blame Marvel now did I? That's what I thought. He can express his thoughts on the film AFTER the studio is done promoting it. You're basically saying, fuck all the people who have worked hard on this movie, by defending him trash talking the film while it still in theaters. It just goes to show how ignorant and immature you really are. People's jobs are more important than someone's vision on the movie.

Surrre.

Mecha wrote:

@yonny616 If it was never changed, then wouldn't it defeat the purpose of calling it reshoots? What the hell are you talking about? I hated Iron Man 3, but I didn't blame Marvel now did I? That's what I thought. He can express his thoughts on the film AFTER the studio is done promoting it. You're basically saying, fuck all the people who have worked hard on this movie, by defending him trash talking the film while it still in theaters. It just goes to show how ignorant and immature you really are. People's jobs are more important than someone's vision on the movie.

Surrre.

What? Read my post again before you respond. Again, what? What does that have to do with anything? So should film reviews also be halted until after the movies promotion? Because it being torn apart by critics like a lion does to a gazelle clearly affected the film just as well. No, all he's saying is fuck you to Fox. Please explain to me how I'm being that.

Shut up!