Mayhem
Scrapple Level: 121
Posts: 1240/3693 EXP: 19607962 For next: 448792
Since: 25.4.03 From: Nashville, TN
Since last post: 2429 days Last activity: 242 days
| #1 Posted on 24.9.04 1027.27 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1028.25 |
I must say I am impressed with these initial shots of the cast in their Fantastic 4 attire. The Thing looks waaaay cooler than I thought he would.
http://filmforce.ign.com/ff/articles/550/550083p1.html Promote this thread! | | Jobberman
Kishke Level: 48
Posts: 273/426 EXP: 791905 For next: 31643
Since: 2.1.02 From: West Palm Beach, FL
Since last post: 3516 days Last activity: 676 days
| #2 Posted on 24.9.04 1139.25 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1140.20 | Jessica Alba looks great.
Is The Thing's hand broken? | evilwaldo
Lap cheong Level: 85
Posts: 1554/1597 EXP: 5735214 For next: 163350
Since: 7.2.02 From: New York, NY
Since last post: 6842 days Last activity: 6623 days
| #3 Posted on 24.9.04 1146.11 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1149.04 | Originally posted by Jobberman Jessica Alba looks great.
Is The Thing's hand broken?
Looks like there was a tear in the costume. They all look cool but The Thing looks small. | dwaters
Bierwurst Level: 90
Posts: 263/1848 EXP: 7027192 For next: 161444
Since: 16.10.02 From: Connecticut
Since last post: 1390 days Last activity: 1370 days
| #4 Posted on 24.9.04 1213.36 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1215.47 | I thought Sue Storm would be Sue Richards--she married Reed in the comics, right? I thought the Reed Richards guy was Jon Stewart at first.
Was hoping The Thing would be a little closer to the comic version....we'll see how it plays in the film...
| oldschoolhero
Knackwurst Level: 112
Posts: 1906/3059 EXP: 15237964 For next: 100289
Since: 2.1.02 From: nWo Country
Since last post: 5421 days Last activity: 5355 days
| #5 Posted on 24.9.04 1219.50 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1221.47 | Thing just looks like Michael Chiklis chiselled out of rock. I know we don't want the guy totally disguised, but he's supposed to be pretty fucking big 'n' bouldery, ya know? Where's his uber-pronounced brow, for instance? | The Vile1
Lap cheong Level: 87
Posts: 760/1694 EXP: 6183767 For next: 209032
Since: 4.9.02 From: California
Since last post: 5447 days Last activity: 5179 days
| #6 Posted on 24.9.04 1355.03 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1355.45 | Originally posted by dwaters I thought Sue Storm would be Sue Richards--she married Reed in the comics, right? I thought the Reed Richards guy was Jon Stewart at first.
Was hoping The Thing would be a little closer to the comic version....we'll see how it plays in the film...
Yeah, but I don't think that came on until later. At the start of the movie she's Dr. Doom's plaything. | DrOp
Frankfurter Level: 65
Posts: 680/859 EXP: 2267502 For next: 68138
Since: 2.1.02
Since last post: 5669 days Last activity: 4536 days
| #7 Posted on 24.9.04 1407.59 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1410.54 | I like the Thing changes. Makes him a little more humanized. I do want to see the Torch on fire. | Alessandro
Lap cheong Level: 88
Posts: 683/1759 EXP: 6644394 For next: 6296
Since: 2.1.02 From: Worcester MA
Since last post: 458 days Last activity: 63 days
| #8 Posted on 24.9.04 1527.38 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1529.01 | The Thing supposedly looks more like the original Jack Kirby design now (don't know if that's what the producers were going for or if it just made for an easier costume) ... And that Jessica Alba pic REALLY makes me pine for some "Dark Angel" reruns.
| Jaguar
Knackwurst Level: 116
Posts: 2480/3284 EXP: 16927394 For next: 396751
Since: 23.1.02 From: In a Blue State finally
Since last post: 1894 days Last activity: 1894 days
| #9 Posted on 24.9.04 1609.44 Reposted on: 24.9.11 1609.58 | Am I the only one disturbed by the fact that Johnny Storm looks older than Reed Richards?
-Jag | JST
Toulouse Level: 76
Posts: 685/1239 EXP: 3923418 For next: 82661
Since: 20.1.02 From: Quebec City, CAN
Since last post: 2228 days Last activity: 694 days
| #10 Posted on 24.9.04 2042.19 Reposted on: 24.9.11 2043.49 | The non-blonde Johnny Storm and Thing's small brow are just fanboy details. I myself can't wait to see Torch flame on.
Think he'll actually say 'Flame on!' ? :P | lagboyz_jfk
Cotechino Level: 25
Posts: 45/92 EXP: 78955 For next: 10666
Since: 18.4.02 From: Chicago
Since last post: 3260 days Last activity: 3260 days
| #11 Posted on 24.9.04 2133.36 Reposted on: 24.9.11 2136.50 | Originally posted by oldschoolhero Thing just looks like Michael Chiklis chiselled out of rock. I know we don't want the guy totally disguised, but he's supposed to be pretty fucking big 'n' bouldery, ya know? Where's his uber-pronounced brow, for instance?
From comicscontinuum.com: [Chiklis] did not want the role if The Thing was going to be a CG character.
"I felt that I would be wasted," he said. "I was assured from the get-go that that wasn't going to be the case, and I was thrilled. They would use some CGI enhancements in creating nuances"
I'm guessing the brow would be one of those nuances. | KaneRobot
Morcilla Level: 57
Posts: 373/631 EXP: 1422935 For next: 63002
Since: 24.2.02 From: Bowels
Since last post: 5860 days Last activity: 5152 days
| #12 Posted on 25.9.04 2354.11 Reposted on: 25.9.11 2356.17 | "I felt that I would be wasted," he said.
Arrogant prick alert. | Jaguar
Knackwurst Level: 116
Posts: 2482/3284 EXP: 16927394 For next: 396751
Since: 23.1.02 From: In a Blue State finally
Since last post: 1894 days Last activity: 1894 days
| #13 Posted on 26.9.04 0031.14 Reposted on: 26.9.11 0031.16 | Would you want *your* name attached to a potential bomb and then end up having almost nothing to do with the portrayal of your character? If they did it like the CGI Hulk there'd be almost nothing for him to do except voice-over. And there are plenty of good voice actors they could hire instead.
-Jag | chill
Landjager Level: 67
Posts: 466/930 EXP: 2532890 For next: 59996
Since: 18.5.02
Since last post: 6122 days Last activity: 6122 days
| #14 Posted on 26.9.04 1345.20 Reposted on: 26.9.11 1346.45 | Exactly. Chiklis is one helluva fantastic actor. One of the best bad asses right now. He was most likely chosen for this reason - so why would the producers NOT want to use his strengths in the film? I'm not a comic book fan, but because of Chiklis and the cool look to the costumes, I'm looking forward to this. | AWArulz
Scrapple Level: 125
Posts: 895/3909 EXP: 21976170 For next: 478057
Since: 28.1.02 From: Louisville, KY
Since last post: 90 days Last activity: 90 days
| | Y!: | |
|
| #15 Posted on 26.9.04 1517.32 Reposted on: 26.9.11 1524.39 | Originally posted by chill Exactly. Chiklis is one helluva fantastic actor. One of the best bad asses right now. He was most likely chosen for this reason - so why would the producers NOT want to use his strengths in the film? I'm not a comic book fan, but because of Chiklis and the cool look to the costumes, I'm looking forward to this.
Here's another link to another pic of chiklis as the Thing (warning: pop-ups) http://www.hollywoodnorthreport.com/cgi-bin/ImageFolio31/imageFolio.cgi?action=view&link=Fantastic_Four/Behind_the_Scene_Photos&image=earlythethingcloseup.jpg&img=&tt= | ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |