"Fantastic Four" director says it ain't his fault that it sucks...

[N-OS X-tasy!]

Onamuji wrote:
In an attempt to gain a better foothold in this field, they're recycling characters that had previous successes and trying to put "spin" on them to make them modern and exciting while still "family friendly."

...which is why Kate Upton will portray Thor in the next Avengers movie. miley-laughing001:

[RgrF]

The pompous theater critic in Michael Keaton's BIRDMAN had an accurate take about these sort of movies and the schlock they perpetuate.

[bazookaman]

Racer X wrote:
I bring it up as I just rewatched the 2005 Fantastic 4, and the 2007 "Silver Surfer" and they didn't suck.

They weren't Roger Corman's FF but they were ok. I REALLY liked Chris Evans as the Human Torch. But I really hated the Thing suit. That was an error. Although, the Thing with no pants is equally disturbing.

[NewtonMP2100]

....so the FAULT is in our Stars......???

[N-OS X-tasy!]

bazookaman wrote:
Although, the Thing with no pants is equally disturbing.

Wouldn't the Thing with no pants be just "the Thing?" miley-laughing001:

[Racer X]

Donald Duck doesn't wear pants.

Chip and Dale are completely nekkid.

[SteveG]

[3d]

N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
[quote=Onamuji]
In an attempt to gain a better foothold in this field, they're recycling characters that had previous successes and trying to put "spin" on them to make them modern and exciting while still "family friendly."

...which is why Kate Upton will portray Thor in the next Avengers movie. miley-laughing001:


That's just obscene. $4 for a comic book?!

[Onamuji]

3d wrote:
That's just obscene. $4 for a comic book?!

...And the page-count's way down from when they were $.12ea.

[NewtonMP2100]

N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
[quote=bazookaman]
Although, the Thing with no pants is equally disturbing.

Wouldn't the Thing with no pants be just "the Thing?" miley-laughing001:

it would be two things then......non......????

him.....and his thang........