Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (9300.1)
    Okay, so I was watching FANTASTIC FOUR RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER LAST NIGHT. I'm not going to whine about the fact that the Surfer was locked up for the majority of the movie. I'm not gonna complain that they turned the Human Torch into the SuperSkrull. Hell,I'm not even gonna complain about what they did to Dr Doom("I'm not really the giving type, Reed! argh!)
    No, what I pondered was a bit more...philosophical, I guess is the word. THe movie had Galactus as a huge nebulous cloud looking thing. Which upset many of my fanboy friends. This forced me to whip out some of my old John Byrne issues of the FF (Paticularly the Trial of MR. Fantastic), in which it had been explained that Galactus appears to any given alien race in a form they, in turn can comprehend. Weather it be an ancient death god, as seen in the Stormbreaker limited, or any of myriad of images shown in that FF issue. NOw back in the years of FF number 50=53, I doubt that wither Stan or Jack considered these notions, however....Hollywood elected to portray Galactus as a giant cloud. MY question then is this: If our REAL imaginations cannot accept a humanoid alien, but can accept a giant cloud as a sentient being, what does that say about our imaginations? Have we evolved passed the need to see something like that in a humanoid form, or (probably more likely) Hollywood execs deemed to use the cloud for what they call a sense of "Realism." WHich makes me chuckle, when they speak of "realism" in a movie.
    I remember reading that the reason Megatron didn't turn into the Walter P 38 pistol in the micheal bay movie, was due to the fact that in the origional cartoon, Characters like Megatron and Soundwave, could also shrink in size when they transformed. This notioned was nixed for "Realism." Never mind that no one blinks that we have robots on screen expressing human emotion. I also laugh when they refer to Micheal Bays Transformers as the 'real' movie, as opposed to the animated 1986 version.

    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2010
    I think film is much different from comics in the level of suspension of disbelief one can maintain.

    Let's take the X-Men. The movie is presented as a SF reality in which genetic alterations can cause superpowers, and people got that. Joe Average Moviegoer said, okay, I'm on board with that concept.

    Now: in the comics, the X-Men go into outer space quite a bit and deal with aliens. Comic readers have no problem with that, because the threshold of disbelief is much higher. For a movie, though, it would seem dumb to have Hugh Jackman as Wolverine in a spacesuit punching the Shi'ar Imperial Guard. That's just one step too far for the movie-viewing public to accept.

    It makes me curious how The Avengers movie is going to be accepted, what with a Scandinavian deity running around with Science Heroes (yes, I understand they're couching Asgard as a super-technological society; will it read as such, or as Magic, is the question).
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2010 edited
    THe movie had Galactus as a huge nebulous cloud looking thing

    I haven't seen the film, but I believe they lifted that bit from my ULTIMATE GALACTUS trilogy for Marvel.
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2010 edited
    they lifted that bit from my ULTIMATE GALACTUS

    Best bit of the movie by far, for that very reason
      CommentAuthorPaul Sizer
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2010
    I always assumed that they blew their CG budget on the Surfer scenes and couldn't see a way to represent Galactus without a ton more design and concepting.
    Although some of the more recent versions of Galactus drawn by non-Marvel artists (James Stokoe) have been great in showing him in a more interesting form.
  2.  (9300.6)
    This notioned was nixed for "Realism."

    Well that, and you can't sell a handgun as a child's toy anymore. It's more realistic to transform Megatron into Luke's X-Wing anyways.
    • CommentAuthorKen Miller
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2010 edited
    The film also lifted dialogue from your Ultimate Galactus trilogy.
    I haven't seen the film, but I believe they lifted that bit from my ULTIMATE GALACTUS trilogy for Marvel.
  3.  (9300.8)
    I was disappointed not to see Galactus in his usual form. Galactus has always had the coolest hat in the Marvel universe.
  4.  (9300.9)
    FauxHammer:In regards to the X-men trilogy, I agree with you one hundred percent. In fact when I went to see X-Men 3 in the theatre, Prof X mentioned Jean envoloped herself ina psycokenetic cacoon. I overheard someone cry out in disbelief; "A CACOON?!?!??!" Now it's a safe bet she never read any of the X-men Pheonix stories, however beyond that, I think it does show a certian restrictions people have on their imaginations. Something similar happend, when I went to see the Re-Make of A NEW HOPE back in the '90s. When C3PO was wondering across Tattoine, complaining that his joints were almost frozen, I heard a woman cry out "FROZEN?!?!" I assume she thought android parts cannot lock under extreme heat, and constant movement.
    In any case, back to your X-men point. Yes, I agree, involving the Shi'ar would have been a bit too much for the average movie goer, and probably would have made the movie an entire mess, considering the number of characters and plots involved. \
    However, back to my original query: weather they got the nebulous cloud Galactus from the Ultimate stories, or not(And why not, Nick Fury is now black in all the movies and cartoons as he is in Ultimate Marvel, and I have no problem with that.Though I think He'd make a cooler Johnny Wraith from the old Larry Hama Wolverine comics. THere's an underused character). SOrry, I digressed there. My questionis this: Lets forget for a moment the Ultimate comics line(or you can include it in the idea) Galactus, as I always understood, appeared in a form in which the natives of the planet he arrives to consume, which they can comprehend. He comes to Earth, he looks Humanoid. HE went to Beta Ray Bills Home Planet, he was a giant squid thing. One of their death gods. SO, I suppose I can include the ultimate marvel version with the FF movie version in my contemplation. IF we, as humans do not need to see Galactus in a form we can comprehend, does that make our imaginations greater, or lesser? Just wondering.
    ANd just to complain about what they did with DOOM and the Surfer(He was trapped in a cell the entire movie!!!) ANd Doom? As I recall he speaks in a sharp scholarly tongue, not the corny one-liners he spat out in both movies. And, as much As I loved the SPidey movies, notice the many excuses they come up with to get the masks of DOOM and SPidey's face, so that the actor can be seen?? Well, that's the movie business for us, I suppose.
  5.  (9300.10)
    LongtimeLUrker: True. That walter p38 Megatron can't even be re released in the US even with an orange tip. I did like the G2 Tank version, though.
  6.  (9300.11)
    The big problem with Galactus wasn't that he was a giant space cloud, it's that he wasn't a threat. The Silver Surfer shooed him away by flapping his wrists and making *tsh!* *tsh!* noises at him. If the Surfer had had a rolled up newspaper all hell might have broken loose.
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2010 edited
    the big problem is that the movies were awful in general. Specially fucking up one nf the best villians out there.

    I'm still defending Doom 2099 as one of the most underrated 90's series :P

    And to be honest, I dont like the idea of the galactus cloud thing.

    @paul sizer - that draw is amazing, thanks for sharing
    • CommentAuthorJim Moore
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2010
    In the TV edit, and maybe in the DVD release, when the Surfer goes to confront Galactus, you see the outline of Galactus's helmet. Perhaps it was the studio hearing the complaints of Marvel and their zombies.
    • CommentTimeDec 14th 2010
    @Paul - That Stokoe Galactus looks rather like Moebius meets Druillet. Very cool - thanks for the link.
  7.  (9300.15)
    Jack: I find myself agreeing with everything you've said, regarding the movies(Comic or otherwise) are generally awfull. I always maintained that Doom 2099 was an extremely underrated comicbook. I felt like someone killed my dog, when the 2099 books went into cancellation. I loved X-men 2099, GR2099, and Doom 2099. Great reads, and Fantastic illustrations. Broke my heart again, a few years ago when they tried to ressurect it with that "Timestorm'' limited. They had changed origins and changed the character of every given character. Ah, well...
    Wasn't a fan of the "Nebulous Cloud" deal either, though I think I understand why it was done, which brings me back to my original question. Being that Galactus could be percieved as a cloud, if that's what the citizens of the planet need to see to comprehend what Galactus may look like. He looked humanoid to humans, as that's what Kirby and Lee(or rather Byrn, later on) decided that that's how humans would need to percieve his presence. Ergo my ultimate question is this: Being that nowadays we only need to see a big cloud to percieve a terravorial threat, does that show an expansion of human imagination, or a stagnation of human imagination? Warren, when you did Ultimate Secret, what was your reason for your doing something similar? If you don't mind my asking, was it a matter of attempting to be completely different, or were the rules surrounding the perception of Galactus' physical appearance(In the standard MU) taken into consideration?