Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Fantastic Four (2005)

This is topic Fantastic Four (2005) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000949

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 07-08-2005, 08:08 AM:

I'm going to make this quick and simple. I was only looking for one thing, that this did not suck ass like the 1994 version. And it didn't, it was a pretty decent film. Not any where near Batman Begins, behind Sin City the best comic book movie ever. I would have to say Fantastic 4 sits some where around 7th on the list of comic book films.

[thumbsup]

out of

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 07-08-2005, 06:08 PM:

Very cool movie. Chris Evans provided great comic relief. Julian McMahon is a great villan although he's better on Nip/Tuck. IT is a great flick with lots of action. Enjoyable all around. I can't wait for Into The Blue to see Jessica Alba in a tight bikini.

Movie 4/5
Jessica Alba 5/5

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-08-2005, 11:48 PM:

I know nothing about the Fantastic Four, but was pleased to see that this involved people thrown into their powers and spent most of the movie trying to make the powers go away. A nice change.

Not great, but certainly worth a watch. 3 out of 5

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 07-09-2005, 03:55 PM:

CINEMA: Century 20 at Jordan Creek, West Des Moines, IA
AUDITORIUM: 10
PRESENTATION: Dolby Digital/THX
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: None [Cool]

RATING: Four fantastic stars (out of four)

"Transporter 2"?!? When was there a "Transporter 1"?!? (Don't answer...I'll check IMDB after I write this.)

Here's an example of what I have to deal with in my life...The "Bad News Bears" redux trailer plays, and Wife #1, who thinks nothing of babbling at regular talk volume through the trailers at any movie, says "That doesn't look anything like the Brooke Shields version."

Poor Tatum.

The major critics all seem to hate this one. I don't see why...Sure it's not deep or brilliant, but it's FUN! I had a blast watching it. The action was cool, the soundtrack decent, and it didn't take itself too seriously (it's pretty funny, actually.) Loved all the characters. I may very well see it again this weekend. General audience reaction was extremely positive.

Also noticed the X-Men 3 poster in the lobby. Might have to fire up the X-Men DVD tonight. [Big Grin]

Posted by John Anastasio (Member # 607) on 07-11-2005, 06:02 AM:

I agree. This was a good, summertime fun flick. I think it had a great mix of characters. Saw it at the AMC Hamilton 24, which always does a great showing. The audience was packed and actually applauded at the end of the film (which only improved the little treat before the credits rolled.) [thumbsup]

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 07-11-2005, 10:14 AM:

3 1/2 out of 5

Perfect summer movie, not a cinematic masterpiece but a fun 2 hours. Maybe could have shaved 5 or 10 minutes off the "human interest story" of "The Thing" in the middle, but other than that it was very well done.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 07-11-2005, 02:38 PM:

Did anyone else look at The Thing in his hat and trench coat and expect him to whip out a pair of sais?

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 07-24-2005, 02:06 PM:

Ben Grim: Midle-Aged mutant ninja thing...

Anywho, just saw this the other night at the Regal Cinemas 14 in Turlock. Good technicians maintain the equipment, lazy projectionists run it...But here's my take on the movie:

The human tourch was hillarious. Great comedy there.
I didn't really like a lot of the dialog and action, especially on the part of the villian. It was very cheesey.
The best visual effects were the thing. The rest pretty well sucked.

2.5/5

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 07-28-2005, 07:30 PM:

Well, so far, most have given this film a FAIR rating. I didn't think it was any great shakes, yet when it was over, I didn't resent having seen it like, say, "Bewitched."

It did seem to me that the script was written back in the 70's for a TV movie and rediscovered recently. (The music score seemed to be from the same source, also.) I kept waiting for the film to "begin." That scene on the bridge was dumb. Ben Grimm started all the ruckus and eventually the crowd is cheering him and the others! And why, other than for titilation, does Sue Storm have to take her clothes off to get through the crowd? Two seconds later, Reed and Johnny are right beside her, so what was the benefit of her going invisible?

Overall, the characters were one-dimensional as hell. Johnny was full of himself. Ben was a hard-ass. Sue was doing the old "If you want this ass, you must kiss it first" routine. And Reed was a DORK! I know there are fans of the comics who will say that everyone was "in character" according to their magazine originals, but even they can't agree that Reed should be a dork!

I wish more comic book adaptations would go the route of 1989's "Batman" and forget about spending most or the whole of the film dealing with origin stories (although, "Batman Begins" did a good job of just that). Just get on with it! And quit worrying about having a sophomoric "joke" every five minutes.

The "X-Men" movies still rule the roost.