@wil wasn't The Incredible Hulk both a sequel to Ang Lee's The Hulk and a movie to bring him into the relatively new MCU? Plus the old TV show had a surprisingly deep reach into pop culture. They could skip Spider-Man's because it was already featured in a movie franchise that made a boatload of money and one that didn't - people know it. The posters on this board are familiar with the Fantastic Four, but I doubt a general audience is. My parents or my wife certainly couldn't tell you anything about them, but they watch the MCU.
@wil wasn't The Incredible Hulk both a sequel to Ang Lee's The Hulk and a movie to bring him into the relatively new MCU? Plus the old TV show had a surprisingly deep reach into pop culture. They could skip Spider-Man's because it was already featured in a movie franchise that made a boatload of money and one that didn't - people know it. The posters on this board are familiar with the Fantastic Four, but I doubt a general audience is. My parents or my wife certainly couldn't tell you anything about them, but they watch the MCU.
Ang Lee's Hulk has nothing to do with the Hulk starring Edward Norton. The Ed Norton movie was most definitely not a sequel.
And as for FF, the same argument you used for Hulk and Spider-Man applies. I mean - the origiin was told in a major motion picture released by Fox with Chris Evans and Jessica Alba, and I think a fair few people actually saw that one. The origin was more sloppily and messily told in the Josh Trank reboot with Michael B. Jordan that far fewer people saw, but still it exists.
I agree with those that think a full retelling of how the FF got their powers might not be necessary
Even if those FF movies didn't exist, if their origin is a compelling and crucial part of the main story the movie tells, then yeah have at it. If not, skip it. Countless movies have been made where they drop you into the important part of that character's story without showing exactly how they got there..sometimes they do because it's part of the plot, maybe even flashbacks. But I for one don't believe origins are always necessary, no matter how well the source material is known. Just show me what I need to know about this character and what they need to overcome.
They need to overcome apathy.
I'm not feeling this casting. Vanessa Kirby is fantastic - no pun intended, and if you haven't seen her in About Time, she's quite funny - and a great anchor. Ebon has the blue eyed, sad sack down. Joseph Quinn and Pedro feel too old for the roles - they'll age out after one film. Plus, no offense to Pedro, but I just don't feel him in this role - and I honestly don't sense chemistry with this group of actors. I *hope* there is, but Marvel's casting perfection streak ended a few projects ago.
Speaking of casting - saw Madame Web. A mess of a movie but props to Dakota Johnson who is doing her best, throughout, to craft an interesting character who takes the plot in with a unique perspective. Then she got third-act-ed and hamstrung and rewritten to ridiculous. The villain is one of the worst performances ever put on screen so much so that only every 15th word is actually in his mouth on screen - his performance is almost entirely ADR - and still awful. I don't understand how this actor got cast. The rest is just a studio throwing shit at the screen because they saw it in the making of another movie that made money and thought that's all it took. I really want to read the shooting script to this film to see what they intended because what is onscreen is... bad.
@wil wasn't The Incredible Hulk both a sequel to Ang Lee's The Hulk and a movie to bring him into the relatively new MCU? Plus the old TV show had a surprisingly deep reach into pop culture. They could skip Spider-Man's because it was already featured in a movie franchise that made a boatload of money and one that didn't - people know it. The posters on this board are familiar with the Fantastic Four, but I doubt a general audience is. My parents or my wife certainly couldn't tell you anything about them, but they watch the MCU.
And as for FF, the same argument you used for Hulk and Spider-Man applies. I mean - the origiin was told in a major motion picture released by Fox with Chris Evans and Jessica Alba, and I think a fair few people actually saw that one. The origin was more sloppily and messily told in the Josh Trank reboot with Michael B. Jordan that far fewer people saw, but still it exists.
I'm going to have to strongly disagree there. Fantastic Four as a film franchise isn't even remotely comparable to Spider-Man or Hulk. When the new movie comes out it will be 20 years since the Alba/Evans movie was released - a full generation. And in those 20 years, the film hasn't been celebrated at all, but forgotten. Spider-Man had a hugely successful trilogy which was followed by a less successful pair of films that also included his origin. Your average movie-goer knew plenty about Spider-Man when Civil War came out in 2016. Hulk had a thorough retelling of his origin in 2003, The Incredible Hulk included parts of the origin in 2008, and Avengers arrived in 2012 - a perfectly acceptable amount of time (plus he had the TV show to fall back on). Meanwhile, the last version of the Fantastic Four to grace theaters in 2015 lost money and few people talk about it. My point stands - your average movie goer in 2025 has little knowledge of the Fantastic Four and if those making the film think their origin is important they're probably going to include it and would be justified in doing so.
I think the FF origin is a pretty important one, in that when done right, Reed feels guilty (or should) about what happens (especially about Ben) - moreso if he talks them into it and they trust his genius, and it was "off the books" - they all need to freak out, and have to choose to stay a team despite that and become a proactive hero team, etc.
I think the origin and immediate aftermath sets up a lot of the character dynamics and motivations too well to skip, and unlike say Spidey, Hulk, Superman and Batman where the basic story setup is well known even among casual viewers, I doubt the FF origin is common knowledge.
You don't have to say take a 45 min block out of a FF movie to tell the origin. You can hit the points thru flashback, dialogue and opening credits. The point should be when they do touch on it to emphasize how it connects to character. Reed's guilt, Ben's pain; perhaps even their original connection to Doom.
They could start the action from the opening credits and explain their origin in a flashback. Or...they could make it an origin story for the first half of the movie and then have them get trapped in the negative zone fighting Doctor Doom to set up an answer for why they haven't been seen in years.
That's what I was thinking.... the physical origin is the first act with the second and third acts being the emotional origin. I haven't seen the old movie in a while but I feel like that's how they did it too though.
Heck, you could theoretically start with them already in space doing the mission, and give context later on. It'll be interesting to see how they decide to do it, that's for sure.
I'm also interested to see how Reed's stretching looks. Almost more than any of the other powers, Thing included. I've heard some rumors that they're going with more of the Kamala Khan "cosmic stretching" thing instead, which I hope isn't true, unless they somehow bring Reed and Kamala together in the future, but Kamala already has her mentor figure with Carol. I want stretchy Pedro Pascal, darnit! Especially in terms of figures- we haven't even gotten an energy effect for Kamala yet. Unless Hasbro were to jam-pack Reed with extras, we still wouldn't. Sandman needs a friend on the shelf so he doesn't feel as lonely with his overly large hands.
I've also been seeing a lot of rumors lately that the big bad is
@joshsquash729 I wouldn't expect Reed's powers to look any different than MOM but maybe they'll wanna differentiate.
If they do a Galactus figure as the wave's BAF, I'm skipping.
Ever since the Haslab Galactus, I've been asking myself what I want for the MCU version's figure and it's a real conundrum for me. Antman was fine because he was that size in the movies, but Galactus needs to be much bigger. At the same time, if I make the room for a massive Galactus, my collection kinda becomes about him, and I'm not even that big of a Galactus fan. I felt the same way about a three foot Scott Lang figure. I love displaying scale disparities but never wanted it to seem like Ant Man is my favorite or something, so I was even happier with a ten inch figure of him. So I dunno... But I think I do want a huge Galactus because the scale would be awesome and he was in secret wars so I kinda have to have him in the collection.. hoping to have him in the back with everyone around and flying in front of him.
As far as needing build up etc, I disagree. I see people saying the same with Doom, and yes that can certainly work, piecemealing a character's story over several movies. But I fully expect a single movie to be capable of telling a character's entire story with depth and impact. Yes some characters get richer and more compelling with many appearances, but I wouldn't say popping Thanos in a scene here and there made him one of them. My opinion of course but I didn't find him that interesting from the string of "something's coming...." promises, but Infinity War was definitely when he got fleshed out and compelling. Taking someone like Loki... To me, if he only ever showed up once in Thor, he would still stand out as one of the best MCU villains on that alone. Serious depth and development, his story was an integral part of the movie.
So if they were to do Galactus like Thanos, it could be a scene just showing he exists and is gonna be a problem. Maybe Deadpool 3's credit scene. Then another showing he is still out there and gonna be a problem, Cap 4's credit scene (it would be amazing to have credit scenes set up something for the next movie coming out again, or even two movies from now, rather than teasing something years out, or maybe never) but his story, motivation, and arc is probably going to really be told in FF. And maybe Eternals did a little of the lifting for Galactus if he is another Celestial. Or maybe he is the one thing Celestials fear, which would still be Eternals laying a bit of a breadcrumb for him. Those massive guys in Eternals? This guy eats them. That's you drilled down, elevator pitch for Galactus and the audience will grasp it right away.
I also am probably growing tired of stretching someone's story out over several movies. Sure, some things can work that way and connections etc are still great, but I'm more for these movies telling a complete story themselves and prefer payoffs for things I wasn't expecting or anticipating for years. Red Skull was perfect because they didn't have a credit scene showing him stuck on that planet as a wraith watching a distant Thanos approaching with Gamora. He's simply 'probably dead', then years later we learn what happened and that was as much importance as he needed.
I dunno, part of this isn't because of you and I hope I'm not coming across as attacking you. And if I do, it's mostly because I see people say the same thing about Doom and I really don't agree. "You can't tell his story in one movie!" But I really feel they SHOULD be able to. Yes, don't kill him in his first appearance and keep bringing him back to make an even richer character, but these movies should showcase already rich characters and tell a complete story with them. And I think they do try, even the worst MCU villains had motives and back stories, but having Malekith show up in some credit scenes and be a supporting villain in something else before Dark World shouldn't be the way to make him better.
One last thing, when I write a book I always strive to keep it around or preferably under 100,000 words. Yes some books need to be more than that, but for me i make sure my second draft loses a lot of fat, redundancies and superfluous stuff. Should I be allowed to do 130,000? Absolutely, but drilling it down only makes it a better read and me a better writer because I get to the point faster rather than sauntering around with flowery language and tedious tangents. And I think relying on multiple okay or even lackluster movies to tell what can be an incredible single movie can be a real crutch.
I have the Haslab Galactus. I would get the BAF if they do one, but mostly I just hope he ends up looking like the Haslab one so I can skip it if I want to.
On to Doom, I echo much of what Ru1977 said above. Yes, I want Doom to be a villain who sticks around, but I don't want a Doom who sits in a chair for 20 movies not doing anything. Most likely this would also end up resulting in Doom being an Avengers villain. I want Doom in a FF sequel and to have a complete story there. He can evolve into an eventual threat for a massive crossover later like Loki, but I want a classic FF vs Doom movie that isn't a dumpster fire. Doom isn't Thanos, and as stated above, no one cared about Sits in Chair Thanks. Infinity War is when he became an all-timer. If he was boring in Infinity War, then he would have sucked. Cause the build up didn't sell him and isn't why audiences cared. I also think if we don't do Jack with Doom outside teases for a ton of movies and make him an eventual Avengers threat without building off his backstory with Reed, Doom just becomes a standard dictator with an army of robots. He isn't unique anymore. You need that first he's a proper villain appearance that tells you who this guy is, and his backstory with Reed is vital to that. Just like before Loki invades Earth and fights the Avengers, you needed to see him battle his brother and see why he became a villain. It made Avengers better by the time we saw him. Doom needs that
As for all these various throw in a character post credits and not do anything with them for 4 or 5 years things Marvel is doing now, it doesnt build hype. Outside of a few fans, who talks about Starfox or Hercules at all? The general audience doesnt care about them, and Marvel gave them no reason to. They didnt add to anything, they were just thrown in. I think Marvel is doing a bad job keeping momentum with new characters. This is why we needed a new lower stakes Avengers movie. To keep new characters involved, build them up, abd keep them in the public eye. Shang-Chi needed to be in something by now. Kate Bishop needed more than a brief Marvels cameo by now. Etc. By the time many of these sequels happen, they're gonna flop for that reason. I get you have way more franchises to service now and it is hard to keep up with the vast quantity, but thats why the Avengers movies were so vital. Making them a Saga ender instead of a Phase ender has proven to be a massive miscalculation
Marvel really needs to figure out where everythingis going and have a better plan. Cause right now, it's too scatter shot and the audience is losing interest. That's my 2 cents
@e-rock I don't know that I could agree with you more.
I came REEEEEEEALLY close to getting the Haslab Galactus but I was hoping for him to show up in the MCU, and guessing I would like the MCU design better. if I'm wrong, it's cool. I'll have saved a few hundred bucks and we both win, heh.
I think you're right, Doom's relationship with Reed should be explored first. Not hinted at, not teased, but explored. Doom, to me, is a great character with a ton of potential because he's the type that could be any Marvel hero's worst enemy. He's got armor, he's got science, he's got magic, and so on. He's even some villains' worst enemy. So Doom COULD show up in multiple heroes' movies, but I still don't want cameos unless it's really DRIVING toward something. And something with a plan rather than two credit scenes that, when you examine them in the context of where he ends up later, don't make a lot of sense anymore. And I know people were trying to get that to happen, guessing he was behind the scenes of many movies (Antman & The Wasp, Wakanda Forever, even Homecoming by buying Avengers Tower, and so on). And maybe he was, we still don't know. Maybe we'll never know who Sonny Burch was working for or who bought Avengers Tower.
And yeah, even as someone who really enjoyed Eternals a lot, I don't care about Starfox. but that's also partly because I think I've accepted I won't see him again for a while, if ever. Hercules felt like such an afterthought rather than a character I'm supposed to care about too. And to be fair, that's how credit scenes were done in 2008. Just a dumb little tag hinting at something they aren't really sure how it'll pay off, but now all these years later I don't think that's as forgivable. Tighten this stuff up. have a plan and have these productions gel more.
I also do agree that characters they've introduced should show up more, like Shang-Chi. Yelena was a great example where she was introduced, then featured well in another project. She should have appeared again by now, I think, had Thunderbolts been released but whatever. And that's been something of a problem for some of these characters since Spider-Man had an entire trilogy between Doctor Strange 1 and 2, but Strange DID show up in three other movies along the way. And Spider-Man is kinda a big deal, I get that.
So while some say Marvel should slow down, I feel the opposite. Introducing new characters shouldn't be slowing the momentum of the franchise; Marvel should be steaming ahead at the same pace just with a wider net. If they're gonna introduce all these new characters, I feel they should get treated the same way as Natasha did in Phases 1 and 2. If that means more movies and shows, then yeah do more. Or have a whole new show called Marvel Presents with each episode showcasing a different character. You could do a Kate Bishop episode but also introduce someone like Firebird. Stuff like the What If episode with Kahhori but live action and in the main continuity. Have throwaway adventures that are twenty minutes long as well as 40 minute stories that could have been a Special Presentation, but it's a nice way to introduce new characters that don't need a show or movie as well as maintaining current characters that are getting too easy to forget about.
Ultimately, e-rock, you said "Marvel really needs to figure out where everything is going and have a better plan. Cause right now, it's too scatter shot and the audience is losing interest." And I completely agree. It doesn't feel like there's a plan. And I don't need every single movie to have a reference or appearance from, say, Kang. That isn't what I mean. not all the movies need to tie together or set up a thing. And they all feel like they set up a thing, but it's a dozen different things that don't seem related and it's hard to care about all of them anymore when it seems like a lot aren't getting resolved. We had Blade's voice in Eternals, and I'm honestly not sure that movie is going to happen anymore. And I get things happen, decisions are made and changed but that feels more like how the whole MCU is rather than just a single 'ah well'. So if you're going to introduce someone like Shang-Chi, have him appear in something else if he isn't getting a sequel, within 3 years I would say. And have a plan for that. it's too much of a complex machine to be winging it anymore. But I definitely agree that a big team-up event, whether it's called Avengers or not, is a better way to close out each phase. And doesn't need to be, nor should it be really, another world/universe ending event with a blue light into the sky. I am not shy with my Dark Avengers affection, but having a bad team come into power would be a cool thing for heroes to team up to combat. Having a street-level team up would a nice idea too. I dunno. I think I'm finally done talking about it for now, heh.
Actually, I lied... I had one other thing to say.
It's not really even a spoiler since it's just a "here's what I would do", but:
I know before Fox was acquired by Disney they had a Doom movie in the works and I actually still think that would be a fantastic move. Pun unintended but I'll leave it there. Doom COULD carry his own movie, and probably have Morgan Le Fay be the villain with Reed as a secondary antagonist. Have a credit scene with Doom in FF if you must but only if the Doom movie it sets up actually comes in within two years of FF. (And for all I know, that will be the case since they have one untitled movie scheduled for seven months after FF (the last movie released before Kang Dynasty) and two others scheduled between Kang Dynasty and Secret Wars.)
Loki was Marvel's first villain to get a show, let Doom be their first villain to headline their own movie.
Latest Post: McFarlane Toys DC Multiverse Our newest member: Perobeagob Recent Posts Unread Posts
