Marvel's Fantastic Four

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Yes, anything Disney produces will face the same bad faith attacks. It doesn’t mean Disney should cave.

Galactus and the four leads are cast perfectly in line with their comic counterparts. It seems very likely this will be an alternative universe Surfer (look at the skyline). There is precedent in the comics for female heralds and even a female Surfer. We already have a (very bad) movie with a male Surfer. The Surfers gender is not important to the character. And finally - very few of the people complaining care AT ALL about the Silver Surfer.

Disney lost a billion dollars on movies last year, when should they start to cave to what their potential audience thinks?

If the comments were split between the pro and con I could see your point but when nearly everyone is against it it doesn’t seem like a winning strategy.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Disney lost a billion dollars on movies last year, when should they start to cave to what their potential audience thinks?

If the comments were split between the pro and con I could see your point but when nearly everyone is against it it doesn’t seem like a winning strategy.

When has doing just what people expect ever delivered on quality content? Or are good stories not really the issue? Predictable schlock is what should actually be done?

Chasing what people say they want is a recipe for disaster. It doesn’t work. If it did work then making creative content would be easy and everyone would do it.

 

[MoonRakerSCM]

Chasing what people say they want is a recipe for disaster.

Subverting expectations and similar thinking has been going over sooooo well for Lucasfilm etc...

 

[doctornick]

When has doing just what people expect ever delivered on quality content? Or are good stories not really the issue? Predictable schlock is what should actually be done?

Chasing what people say they want is a recipe for disaster. It doesn’t work. If it did work then making creative content would be easy and everyone would do it.

"recipe for disaster" is a very strong and over the top assessment. I would agree that "doing just what people expect" isn't any sort of a guarantee of anything but it is neither a good nor bad thing - it still depends on execution and quality of the product in general.

That being said, a big reason for producing media that is based on existing IP is to build upon the good faith and interest of that IP. Silver Surfer as a character is not an A-list guy but is reasonable well know and is strongly associated with the Fantastic Four. So, if you are developing a movie to capitalize on the familiarity and built-in positivity of that IP, it does make sense to produce something consistent with how that IP has been previously presented and established.

That doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't use Shalla-Bal, but that decision intrinsically has the potential to fail to bring in people it otherwise might since they don't care about Shalla-Bal the way they do regarding Norrin Radd and even more potentially harmful actually turn off people who like the Norrin Radd character and deter them from going to see FF. And that, to me, is the main concern because I want the MCU to thrive, I want people to go to these movies and for them to have great box offices. I love the MCU. so I am worried when they make choices that has the potential to diminish the box office and reputation of the brand and result in fewer movies or less ambitious ones, etc.

 

[Disney Irish]

I think people need to take a breath here and stop hyperventilating.

We don't know the story yet. For all we know Norrin may still play a role in the movie. Or for reasons yet know maybe he is killed during the movie and Shalla-Bal has to take over. Or any number of scenarios can be played out here, including where the whole story is in an alternate version of the MCU not part of the main MCU continuity.

Which thinking about it is probably the case here, an alternate dimension which is already mentioned by another poster here, just like Monica is in an alternate X-Men dimension at the end of Marvels. And my theory right now is that by the end of the movie F4 will have joined the main MCU continuity and this version of the Surfer will likely have been killed off.

 

[lazyboy97o]

"recipe for disaster" is a very strong and over the top assessment. I would agree that "doing just what people expect" isn't any sort of a guarantee of anything but it is neither a good nor bad thing - it still depends on execution and quality of the product in general.

That being said, a big reason for producing media that is based on existing IP is to build upon the good faith and interest of that IP. Silver Surfer as a character is not an A-list guy but is reasonable well know and is strongly associated with the Fantastic Four. So, if you are developing a movie to capitalize on the familiarity and built-in positivity of that IP, it does make sense to produce something consistent with how that IP has been previously presented and established.

That doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't use Shalla-Bal, but that decision intrinsically has the potential to fail to bring in people it otherwise might since they don't care about Shalla-Bal the way they do regarding Norrin Radd and even more potentially harmful actually turn off people who like the Norrin Radd character and deter them from going to see FF. And that, to me, is the main concern because I want the MCU to thrive, I want people to go to these movies and for them to have great box offices. I love the MCU. so I am worried when they make choices that has the potential to diminish the box office and reputation of the brand and result in fewer movies or less ambitious ones, etc.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is built on lesser known characters and not just following what was established.

 

[doctornick]

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is built on lesser known characters and not just following what was established.

Not sure I really agree. The MCU didn't have access to the best known Marvel characters (Spider-Man, X-Men) but Hulk, Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc were still reasonable well know and popular and they formed the basis for the franchise. Furthermore, in the movies, while they didn't follow the storylines exactly, they largely lifted plots and other elements very directly from comics. I'd actually argue that the early MCU gave the audiences exactly what they wanted from those characters - a boy scout old fashioned Captain America, an intelligent and philandering Tony Stark who improves himself, a Thor and Loki complicated relationship, etc.

In contrast to (for example) Man of Steel that was a Superman was very few people wanted to see and was a disappointment that was exacerbated by a Dawn of Justice that virtually no one liked. Mainly because they did not follow what people wanted to see for those characters.

Or to use more recent examples....

Top Gun: Maverick was basically a copy of the original film, rehashing all the same story beats and going out of its way to remind the audience of the previous film.

Barbie presented itself as a bubbly fish out of water film, but subverted expectations by being a more heavy handed commentary on patriarchy and being a woman in modern society.

Both films made well over a billion dollars.

Point being, there's no "right" way to use an IP. Sometimes catering to the masses' expectations works best; sometimes going against the grain is better. My comment to you is that making a blanket statement that doing what people "say they want" automatically being bad is just silly because than can be a good strategy if executed well and in the right circumstance.

 

[Disney Irish]

Not sure I really agree. The MCU didn't have access to the best known Marvel characters (Spider-Man, X-Men) but Hulk, Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc were still reasonable well know and popular and they formed the basis for the franchise. Furthermore, in the movies, while they didn't follow the storylines exactly, they largely lifted plots and other elements very directly from comics. I'd actually argue that the early MCU gave the audiences exactly what they wanted from those characters - a boy scout old fashioned Captain America, an intelligent and philandering Tony Stark who improves himself, a Thor and Loki complicated relationship, etc.

In contrast to (for example) Man of Steel that was a Superman was very few people wanted to see and was a disappointment that was exacerbated by a Dawn of Justice that virtually no one liked. Mainly because they did not follow what people wanted to see for those characters.

Or to use more recent examples....

Top Gun: Maverick was basically a copy of the original film, rehashing all the same story beats and going out of its way to remind the audience of the previous film.

Barbie presented itself as a bubbly fish out of water film, but subverted expectations by being a more heavy handed commentary on patriarchy and being a woman in modern society.

Both films made well over a billion dollars.

Point being, there's no "right" way to use an IP. Sometimes catering to the masses' expectations works best; sometimes going against the grain is better. My comment to you is that making a blanket statement that doing what people "say they want" automatically being bad is just silly because than can be a good strategy if executed well and in the right circumstance.

Or let me boil this down to....

You never know what the audience will like or expect, ie there is no crystal ball, so its best to just tell the best story you can and hope for the best with regards to audience reaction.

 

[erasure fan1]

Bowing to the will of the people throwing a tantrum over diversity is a bad idea.

I wouldn't say it's bowing. Personally I just want to see Norrin Radd. And I don't think I'm the only comic fan who would rather see him in a fantastic 4 movie that does him justice. Rather than a character that was in just a few issues of the comics that even most well above average comic fans never read. I would have no issue if they used Norrin and they worked in Shalla to the story. Let people see the character, get to know the character, and if done right, they'll like the character. Then it's a Win win. Surfer fans should be happy, and you've got diversity.

Diversity will always be an "unnecessary risk." That's exactly what the screaming people are seeking to exploit.

I don't agree. When done right, it's never really a risk. Now to be fair, we have no idea at this point if it is being done right. I think the surfer is more popular than I think you are giving him credit for. You are ALWAYS going to have people trying to exploit it because...Disney. But I think there could be a good amount of fans who this annoys. Not because diversity, but because they want to see the surfer they know. I hope this is great, I want the Fantastic four to be a hit. I'll be very interested in how the trailer goes.

 

[Disney Irish]

I wouldn't say it's bowing. Personally I just want to see Norrin Radd. And I don't think I'm the only comic fan who would rather see him in a fantastic 4 movie that does him justice. Rather than a character that was in just a few issues of the comics that even most well above average comic fans never read. I would have no issue if they used Norrin and they worked in Shalla to the story. Let people see the character, get to know the character, and if done right, they'll like the character. Then it's a Win win. Surfer fans should be happy, and you've got diversity.

I don't agree. When done right, it's never really a risk. Now to be fair, we have no idea at this point if it is being done right. I think the surfer is more popular than I think you are giving him credit for. You are ALWAYS going to have people trying to exploit it because...Disney. But I think there could be a good amount of fans who this annoys. Not because diversity, but because they want to see the surfer they know. I hope this is great, I want the Fantastic four to be a hit. I'll be very interested in how the trailer goes.

Some of us comic fans are going to be more hardcore about this than others. But lets be honest here, how many "Surfer fans" are there really at this point? The 2007 film barely moved the needle in terms of box office. And while you can say it was because it wasn't a good movie, its not like the opening was stellar before any of that was known. So its not like there was a huge "Surfer" following going to see it.

The only question is will general audiences like what is shown on screen in its entirety not just this character. And for that we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

When has doing just what people expect ever delivered on quality content? Or are good stories not really the issue? Predictable schlock is what should actually be done?

Chasing what people say they want is a recipe for disaster. It doesn’t work. If it did work then making creative content would be easy and everyone would do it.

Lord of the rings gave us what we expected and made bank, same with the Harry Potter series, etc. Giving fans the stories they expect is very often very profitable.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Lord of the rings gave us what we expected and made bank, same with the Harry Potter series, etc. Giving fans the stories they expect is very often very profitable.

Arwen’s role in the films is very much expanded from the novels, where she barely appears. She replaces a male character, Glorfindel, in a big heroic moment. If Disney made the films today they would be attacked by the usual suspects. Because this is all manufactured.

 

[Disney Irish]

Lord of the rings gave us what we expected and made bank, same with the Harry Potter series, etc. Giving fans the stories they expect is very often very profitable.

And yet both fandoms complained that the movies take huge departures from their source books, ie not meeting their expectations, and say the books are better. Just do a google search and you'll get millions of hits on the complaints.

You cannot please everyone and meet all expectations, there will always be someone that claims the source material is better. So better to just tell a good story and try to rise above whatever expectation is set.

 

[MoonRakerSCM]

Arwen’s role in the films is very much expanded from the novels, where she barely appears. She replaces a male character, Glorfindel, in a big heroic moment. If Disney made the films today they would be attacked by the usual suspects. Because this is all manufactured.

You obsess over your "usual suspects" more than you do anything else. Youre not having this discussion in good faith, only to attack your feared "usual suspects".

 

[AdventureHasAName]

When has doing just what people expect ever delivered on quality content? Or are good stories not really the issue? Predictable schlock is what should actually be done?

The first decade of Marvel ... which, aside from the Guardians of the Galaxy, was basically a Stan Lee and Jack Kirby blue print of the greatest hits of Marvel Comics (sans the Fox/Sony properties). Was the first decade of Marvel popular with the public? Did it make enough money?

Did it take some liberties? Sure, but I'd argue they were the things the public rejected the most (like the Mandarin fake out or the Dark Elves).

 

[Casper Gutman]

The first decade of Marvel ... which, aside from the Guardians of the Galaxy, was basically a Stan Lee and Jack Kirby blue print of the greatest hits of Marvel Comics (sans the Fox/Sony properties). Was the first decade of Marvel popular with the public? Did it make enough money?

Did it take some liberties? Sure, but I'd argue they were the things the public rejected the most (like the Mandarin fake out or the Dark Elves).

The films captured the SPIRIT of the characters accurately. That’s what matters. The stories were more or less originals, amalgamations of bits and pieces of stories from decades of comics. Most films after phase 1 - Guardians, Civil War, Ragnarok, Ant-Man, etc. - went in completely different directions from existing comic stories.

There is nothing about making the Surfer a woman that betrays the SPIRIT of the character.

It should also be said that the Surfer is a really boring character whose biggest fan was Stan Lee, since he could use the pseudo-messianic alien to mouth his liberal messages. Surfer was Lee’s “very special episode” character. Which makes the current “outrage” all the more ironic.

 

[erasure fan1]

There is nothing about making the Surfer a woman that betrays the SPIRIT of the character.

I mostly agree. I know you don't think they need to "bend the knee" to some YouTubers and podcasters. But I think that Marvel needs a big win. It's not about a female surfer, it's about the perception. There's a lot of casuals, at least that I know and talk to, that said, oh hear we go again. Most don't truly understand what is most likely going on. This looks like it won't be our fantastic four. It's probably an alternate universe version. Therefore that makes shalla their herald. Leaving Norrin to still show up in the main timeline as the surfer. The big problem, is Marvel doesn't have the trust factor going for them right now. This same info would have been met with resounding approval if it was a mid phase 2 or early 3 film. Everyone would have just given them the benefit of the doubt. So while I'm interested in what this ends up being. I can't help but think it would have been a better play to start with Norrin and introduce Shalla later and avoid the constant noise.

 

[AdventureHasAName]

It should also be said that the Surfer is a really boring character whose biggest fan was Stan Lee, since he could use the pseudo-messianic alien to mouth his liberal messages. Surfer was Lee’s “very special episode” character. Which makes the current “outrage” all the more ironic.

It's only ironic if you believe those who think Marvel should do it's best to stick to popular decades-old source material as closely as it can are all mindless drones who are reflexively against any liberal messaging appearing in any mass media (as if 99% of every piece of entertainment media for the last 75 years hasn't had liberal messaging and they just haven't figured it out yet).

 

[Casper Gutman]

It's only ironic if you believe those who think Marvel should do it's best to stick to popular decades-old source material as closely as it can are all mindless drones who are reflexively against any liberal messaging appearing in any mass media (as if 99% of every piece of entertainment media for the last 75 years hasn't had liberal messaging and they just haven't figured it out yet).

As previously discussed, the MCU films are excellent at capturing the SPIRIT of the characters but deviate wildly from any published storylines. They take isolated moments and ideas from the comics but don’t even try to reproduce plotlines. For instance, look at how different Ant-Man is from any published iteration.

These changes go largely unmentioned outside isolated voices in obscure corners of the fan community. There’s only a couple, very specific kinds of changes guaranteed to start uproars, all incited and amplified by a massive network on online commentators and major media outlets. “Fidelity to the source” only becomes the battlecry when a characters race or gender is altered.

There is nothing about changing the Surfer’s gender that alters the SPIRIT of the character. It is a less impactful change then making Janet van Dyne an aging secret agent instead of a socialite fashion designer or getting rid of the Thor’s entire Donald Blake persona. The change is not causing an uproar because of “fidelity,” it is doing so because it plays into much larger debates taking place in American culture.

 

[AdventureHasAName]

There’s only a couple, very specific kinds of changes guaranteed to start uproars, all incited and amplified by a massive network on online commentators and major media outlets. “Fidelity to the source” only becomes the battlecry when a characters race or gender is altered.

Except nobody cared when they made Nick Fury black. Or Heimdall (which is hilarious in light of Norse mythology). Or the Ancient One being a white woman (which is hilarious in light of the fact that Marvel was falling all over itself at that point to find an asian hero character - there was some eye-rolling because people could see where Marvel was headed with all of this, but nobody cared about the character so it was basically shoulder shrugged). Or the Mandarin vaguely-arab (fans hated the "he was really an British actor" reveal, but not that an academy award winner was being cast to play a middle-eastern terrorist leader).

That said, the Silver Surfer has been a man for sixty years. Nobody would have cared if this woman was cast to play Frankie Raye. And nobody would care if they were using a Shalla-Bal - the Silver Surfer's non-cosmic powered girlfriend - in a film where Norin Radd becomes the Silver Surfer. The gripe is that they are replacing Norin Radd/Silver Surfer with a woman because Disney can't help itself. And the reason the gripe will hold water is because it is true.

For what it is worth, it is exactly this same approach that has crippled the comic book industry for a decade (replacing beloved characters with 50-60 years of history) with DEI replacements that nobody cares about (rather than creating black, or female, or asian, or gay characters that people do care about) - Jane Foster Thor, Sam Wilson Captain America, Amadeus Cho Hulk, Riri Williams Iron Man, etc.