Doctor Doom is an anti-social computer programmer in the upcoming Fantastic Four film

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder if anyone has considered making him a megalomaniacal criminal mastermind with a cape, mask and hood. That would be a weird angle, but I could get behind it.
 
You mean the character from DoFP called Quicksilver that has a terrible costume, acts nothing like the comic version, has powers more akin a character called The Flash and could have solved the whole movie he appears on his own but writers just put him on a bus because reasons?

I hated DoFPs Quicksilver.
I thought the power part was consistent in that everything appears in slow motion to him. The gripe is that he's much faster than his usual comic version (used to Mach 1?)
 
What were they thinking? Seriously, what were they thinking? Are they trying to sabotage Marvel? Good Lord, this is hilarious... on the other hand, now I can't wait to see this.
 
You mean the character from DoFP called Quicksilver that has a terrible costume, acts nothing like the comic version, has powers more akin a character called The Flash and could have solved the whole movie he appears on his own but writers just put him on a bus because reasons?

I hated DoFPs Quicksilver.

Pffft. They did a pretty good job of adapting the character in their own way. Liberties were taken, but honestly, liberties are always taken with movies. At least the character was still fun.
 
Pffft. They did a pretty good job of adapting the character in their own way. Liberties were taken, but honestly, liberties are always taken with movies. At least the character was still fun.

Much like nearly every other character in the Fox X-Men universe, the characters only resemble their comic counterpart in name and power only. Which shows the level of depth Fox considers that property.
 
tumblr_mipbg3Bs621r33r0fo1_500.gif
 
Much like nearly every other character in the Fox X-Men universe, the characters only resemble their comic counterpart in name and power only. Which shows the level of depth Fox considers that property.

To me, as long as you get a general feel for the character, it's okay. Compared to what Marvel did to The Mandarin, Quicksilver was done great justice.
 
You mean the character from DoFP called Quicksilver that has a terrible costume, acts nothing like the comic version, has powers more akin a character called The Flash and could have solved the whole movie he appears on his own but writers just put him on a bus because reasons?

I hated DoFPs Quicksilver.

He runs fast. What the fuck else is there to his powers exactly?
 
To me, as long as you get a general feel for the character, it's okay.

And that is the key. You can change origins and whatnot, but as long as the core of the character is intact, it is fine. For all the changes that the X films have done, most of the characters have been good representations of their comic counterparts, even if some story deviations have occurred.
 
Yeah, I hate change too.

Changing a character's backstory isn't always a good thing just fyi.

I wonder if they're gonna pull a Jamie Foxx from ASM2 and just treat him like utter shit for the first half of the movie, so we can have a "sympathetic" villain.
 
And that is the key. You can change origins and whatnot, but as long as the core of the character is intact, it is fine. For all the changes that the X films have done, most of the characters have been good representations of their comic counterparts, even if some story deviations have occurred.
Eh... several depictions are very poor with regard to representing the core character... Rogue, Storm, Emma Frost, new Mystique (comic Mystique is like 200 years old, incredibly jaded and only looking out for number one, I guess they capture that last bit okay in DoFP to an extent), Cyclops, Angel, Iceman...

I don't think I'd consider any of them matching their comic counterparts' core characters.
They mostly tell an okay tale, but I wouldn't say they've been good representations.

Magneto, Xavier and Wolverine have been pretty good in both sets of movies.
Nicholas Hoult's Beast kind of captures what a younger Beast went through okay.
 
Changing a character's backstory isn't always a good thing just fyi.

I wonder if they're gonna pull a Jamie Foxx from ASM2 and just treat him like utter shit for the first half of the movie, so we can have a "sympathetic" villain.

DOOM doesn't need to be sympathetic. He's DOOM. People loved the Joker and he was in no way shape or form sympathetic. People need to realize that we don't always need to relate to a character to like them, sometimes just being awesome is enough.
 
DOOM doesn't need to be sympathetic. He's DOOM. People loved the Joker and he was in no way shape or form sympathetic. People need to realize that we don't always need to relate to a character to like them, sometimes just being awesome is enough.

Yes fuck sympathetic villains.
 
I kind of feel like outside of making SHIELD a bigger deal and going back to teen Spidey, most of the Ultimate Universe was pretty half baked.
The Ultimate universe was/is kind of a mixed bag overall (don't you dare shit talk The Ultimates), but I just specifically mean that Doom's first story arc was completely milquetoast and banal. They did nothing to justify him being the arch-nemesis of the FF.
 
Here's what really makes no sense about all of this. They can't sell toys with this approach.

Why would anyone make a superhero movie with no merchandise potential? It's just bad business.
 
Here's what really makes no sense about all of this. They can't sell toys with this approach.

Why would anyone make a superhero movie with no merchandise potential? It's just bad business.

This is FOX we are talking about. The company that laughed at George Lucas for wanting to retain the merchandise rights for his Star Wars movies.
 
First off, to all the apologists for this movie over the past few months...well, yeah.

Secondly, I said this before and I believe it now, but I think Fox is deliberately trying to hurt Marvel's property due to their Film success in past few years.
I am with you on that second part.
Apocalypse will probably be the end of xmen films, and fantastic fours ginna fail

Fox wants out of the comic book business and is trying to hurt it before it leaves
 
Here's what really makes no sense about all of this. They can't sell toys with this approach.

Why would anyone make a superhero movie with no merchandise potential? It's just bad business.

I think it's obvious they're not making toys for this movie.
 
I am with you on that second part.
Apocalypse will probably be the end of xmen films, and fantastic fours ginna fail

Fox wants out of the comic book business and is trying to hurt it before it leaves

What the hell have you guys been smoking? Yes, Fantastic Four is looking terrible but Days Of Future Past was Fox´s top grossing movie of the year. Apocalypse will be the end of the current crop of X-Men movies but they are moving ahead with more X-Men movies , they are doing a Deadpool movie and there´s a F4 sequel scheduled for 2017.
 
What the hell have you guys been smoking? Yes, Fantastic Four is looking terrible but Days Of Future Past was Fox´s top grossing movie of the year. Apocalypse will be the end of the current crop of X-Men movies but they are moving ahead with more X-Men movies , they are doing a Deadpool movie and there´s a F4 sequel scheduled for 2017.

they're also doing a solo gambit movie and trying to get something planned for mystique.

i aint watching any of that shit except for apocalypse and the last wolverine movie (salute to the gawd's retirement). also i'll check out fantastic four if it's any good, i like the cast and director even if it's sounding like a mess.
 
they're also doing a solo gambit movie and trying to get something planned for mystique.

i aint watching any of that shit except for apocalypse and the last wolverine movie (salute to the gawd's retirement). also i'll check out fantastic four if it's any good, i like the cast and director even if it's sounding like a mess.

Yeah, forgot about Gambit and Wolverine 3.

I´m quite interested in F4. The whole thing sounds nuts but Josh Trank did a great job with Chronicle and Miles Teller and Michael B. Jordan are quite talented.
 
I dunno. The villains in The Dark Knight Trilogy were pretty different from their comic book selves, were people mad over that?
The Dark Knight Trilogy was rooted in the last decade, when gritty realism and a grounded re-imagining of material was a "thing" trending. And to be fair, I might not be the biggest Nolan fan, but his handling of the Batman franchise was done with respect(to the point where, y'know, regardless of the lack of the more fantastical elements within the Batman series, it still oozed those Batman feels).

I guess I don't see a problem with this if it's a modern re-imagining. Is it really so bad?
The thing is, using buzzwords like "grounded", "gritty", and aiming for a younger, hip cast while focusing on taboos regarding the internet, that almost feels straight out of the last decade(00s).

We are past the first decade of the new millennium, and super hero movies have moved on from being the "gritty, grounded" shit that was being shoved in our faces during the 00s.
 
artistic liberty is fine if you can spin a good movie out of it. the nolan batmans and singer xmens may not be wholly comic accurate but they're great films in their own right (except TDKR)

plus i'm only just getting into comics but i already notice so many conflicting comic runs and interpretations. it's up to the writers of these books and scriptwriter/directors for films. this doctor doom sounds a lot less interesting than what he 'should' be. but maybe they'll get a good movie out of this
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom