«

I watched FANTASTIC FOUR last nite, finally, and found it to be
not-so-good.

I'm already tired of the bad guy being a CEO of a major corporation and
having a military contract so he gets "Cool ass weapon #x" (SPIDERMAN,
BATMAN BEGINS, now F4). The Reed/Sue relationship just doesn't ring
true at all, mostly owing to a horribly contrived conflict.

What was decent was that there was a reasoable effort to show the
relationship between the 4 superheroes, which IMO is what made the
comic book work. Ben/Reed, Ben/Johnny were the better established
ones, but even those never really had a chance to breathe. I felt that
much of the characterizations and relationship development were
perfunctory when they should have been the spine of the film. I'm not
sure if it's writing, acting, or just chemistry/charisma that was
subpar, but certainly something was amiss.

Some of the cheezy humor actually worked pretty well for me. Mostly
Johnny and Ben. Ben crushing Johnny's car, Johnny tossing a flameball
at the back of Ben's head, Ben making fun of the unis ("Maybe it's
missing a utility belt"), ...

Much of the plot was stupid, but comicbook-stupid so not too terrible,
but I really would have liked to have seen something more inspired.

Overall, I almost enjoyed parts of it, didn't really hate parts of it,
and watched the whole thing.

It's not awful, but it's certainly not a summer tentpole movie.

-goro-

"I'm already tired of the bad guy being a CEO of a major corporation
and
having a military contract so he gets "Cool ass weapon #x" (SPIDERMAN,
BATMAN BEGINS, now F4)"

The villains in Batman Begins are -- a gangster, a mad scientist and a
psychotic mystic warrior.

Unless you've seen some cut of the film where someone else is the
villain.

John Harkness.

On 5 Dec 2005 06:38:02 -0800, wrote:

>>
>>
>>
>>"I'm already tired of the bad guy being a CEO of a major corporation
>>and
>>having a military contract so he gets "Cool ass weapon #x" (SPIDERMAN,
>>BATMAN BEGINS, now F4)"
>>
>>The villains in Batman Begins are -- a gangster, a mad scientist and a
>>psychotic mystic warrior.
>>
>>Unless you've seen some cut of the film where someone else is the
>>villain.
>>
>>John Harkness.

You're forgetting the temporary head of Wayne Enterprise!
--
The Seabat

wrote:
> "I'm already tired of the bad guy being a CEO of a major corporation
> and
> having a military contract so he gets "Cool ass weapon #x" (SPIDERMAN,
> BATMAN BEGINS, now F4)"
>
> The villains in Batman Begins are -- a gangster, a mad scientist and a
> psychotic mystic warrior.
>
> Unless you've seen some cut of the film where someone else is the
> villain.
>
> John Harkness.

You're right. In BATMAN BEGINS, it was Bruce Wayne having the cool ass
weapon via military contract. The point remains that this is (imo)
already a tired plot element.

-goro-

Well, Bruce Wayne was always an insanely rich guy.

Batman Begins just gets a little explicit about where the money comes
from.

John Harkness

wrote:
>
>
> "I'm already tired of the bad guy being a CEO of a major corporation
> and
> having a military contract so he gets "Cool ass weapon #x" (SPIDERMAN,
> BATMAN BEGINS, now F4)"
>
> The villains in Batman Begins are -- a gangster, a mad scientist and a
> psychotic mystic warrior.

And a smug corporate jerk who kicks out the obligatory Morgan Freeman
Character.

Derek Janssen (but, other than that...)

<> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
> Well, Bruce Wayne was always an insanely rich guy.
>
> Batman Begins just gets a little explicit about where the money comes
> from.

Well, I appreciated that Batman Begins didn't show an incompetent police
force as did Batman & Robin. True, the police force was crooked and mostly
in Falcone's back pocket, but at least they were busy doing something. I
liked Gary Oldman's portrayal of Gordon, and I think there's room in the
future movies to show Gordon covering up or thwarting any investigation into
who Batman really is.

In the original series, of which I liked the first two films, Burton made it
semi-believeable. But by the time Schumacher got his hands on the films, he
threw any semblance of logic right out the window. For example, Batman's
batboat explodes/crashes twice (BR,BF), his plane crashes twice(B,BF), and
the batmobile sustains a varying degree of damage over the course of the
films, and it makes you wonder how the Gotham P.D. were never able to trace,
using radar, where the batwing ever took off from. I mean, there are only so
many locations in Gotham where someone with a lot of money and time on their
hands could afford to build these weapons and them launch them. So at least
Nolan is laying some groundwork for plausibility by keeping the situations
and motivations as real as possible.

-------------------------------------
Icebreaker
"Look, you have to understand, I was a teenage runaway for thirty-two years.
I did things I wouldn't force on a mule, and that includes things I forced
on a mule."

Once Upon A Time Goro wrote:

>I watched FANTASTIC FOUR last nite, finally, and found it to be
>not-so-good.
>
>I'm already tired of the bad guy being a CEO of a major corporation and
>having a military contract so he gets "Cool ass weapon #x" (SPIDERMAN,
>BATMAN BEGINS, now F4). The Reed/Sue relationship just doesn't ring
>true at all, mostly owing to a horribly contrived conflict.
>
>What was decent was that there was a reasoable effort to show the
>relationship between the 4 superheroes, which IMO is what made the
>comic book work. Ben/Reed, Ben/Johnny were the better established
>ones, but even those never really had a chance to breathe. I felt that
>much of the characterizations and relationship development were
>perfunctory when they should have been the spine of the film. I'm not
>sure if it's writing, acting, or just chemistry/charisma that was
>subpar, but certainly something was amiss.
>
>Some of the cheezy humor actually worked pretty well for me. Mostly
>Johnny and Ben. Ben crushing Johnny's car, Johnny tossing a flameball
>at the back of Ben's head, Ben making fun of the unis ("Maybe it's
>missing a utility belt"), ...
>
>Much of the plot was stupid, but comicbook-stupid so not too terrible,
>but I really would have liked to have seen something more inspired.
>
>Overall, I almost enjoyed parts of it, didn't really hate parts of it,
>and watched the whole thing.
>
>It's not awful, but it's certainly not a summer tentpole movie.

You'd be better served by just watching the movie that inspired it:
"The Incredibles".


**
Captain Infinity
...faster than the speed of dark

On 5 Dec 2005 06:38:02 -0800, wrote:

>"I'm already tired of the bad guy being a CEO of a major corporation
>and having a military contract so he gets "Cool ass weapon #x" (SPIDERMAN,
>BATMAN BEGINS, now F4)"
>
>The villains in Batman Begins are -- a gangster, a mad scientist and a
>psychotic mystic warrior.
>
>Unless you've seen some cut of the film where someone else is the
>villain.


The OP might have been referring to the character played by Rutger Hauer

"Captain Infinity" <> wrote in message
news:...
> You'd be better served by just watching the movie that inspired it:
> "The Incredibles".
>

You're implying that The Incredibles was a comic book or idea way b4
Fantastic 4 was? The Fantastic 4 was created in like 1961...