-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
'Fantastic Four' 3D conversion officially scrapped (2D Only)
- Thread starter EroticSushi
- Start date
- Status
Either they try to salvage the franchise with a better sequel or they sell the rights back to Marvel like what happened after Ghost Rider 2 tanked. This is assuming the movie bombs.
Again, if the rumors are to be believed, then the 3D budget was redirected towards reshoots. If true, that sounds like a better use of the movie's total budget to me. I'd rather have a better film with no 3D than a bad film with 3D. Though the fact that they had to sacrifice the 3D budget at all is worrying, especially if the amount of reshoots needed equated to the entire 3D conversion budget.
But then there's this quote.
Clearly 3D for the film was their original intention, which does lend credence to the rumor that the reshoots for the film took up the part of the budget that would have been the 3D budget. Either that or Fox doesn't feel confident enough in the film to convert it into 3D, but I feel like they'd at least make an effort to salvage the film if that were the case.Simon Kinberg said:
If Fox had any confidence in it at all, they wouldn't have had to chose one or the other.
If they aren't doing a 3D conversion, that means that:
A), they don't feel that the extra money generated from 3D showings would justify the cost
and
B), related, they don't think theaters will be willing to give up other movies already using their 3D projectors.
Or...
C) Fox is trying to play the long-term game & is trying to salvage the film for future sequels to be in 3D. Again, if the rumors are true, then the film was in pretty bad shape prior to the reshoots (not the Josh Trank set nightmares, Hollywood Reporter already verified those).
Again, it could be seen as a lack of confidence, but it at least would show that Fox is more concerned about the long-term success of their films & their potential sequels. Put it this way, you wouldn't want all the good-will from DoFP to be pissed away with the F4 reboot. Now don't get me wrong, there's still a part of me that thinks that Fox isn't confident in this film, & in any other occasion I'd agree with you, but I'm trying to be realistically optimistic about this.
Josh Trank, man. I was at Star Wars Celebration where he was announced to be at the panel and then we were told he wasn't going to be there because he was "sick." Immediately knew something was up.
What an epic career implosion.
Big disaster, and a warning sign about graduating young directors through the ranks too quickly. Give them time to work out the kinks in their directing style as they move up through budget levels.
Trank couldn't take the pressure and things got out of control.
What an epic career implosion.
Big disaster, and a warning sign about graduating young directors through the ranks too quickly. Give them time to work out the kinks in their directing style as they move up through budget levels.
Trank couldn't take the pressure and things got out of control.
PartTimeWarrior
Banned
Now scrap the rest of the movie
3D conversion is a revenue generating move. If Fox believed the movie would be fixed with reshoots, they wouldn't use the conversion money.
I have a best friend who's on his way towards becoming a film director. I'm sure he'll succeed, but I hope he sees Josh Trank's career implosion as a "What Not to Do" for his directing career.
In other news, the footage for the F4 reboot shown at the panel was met with mixed reactions.
Movies have a set budget to stay within, both for the film itself & for marketing. It's entirely possible that they just burned through too much of the budget for reshoots to have any leftover for the 3D conversion.
You're not getting what I'm saying.
3D conversion is something a studio does to increase their take on a film. It's not a creative decision, the director does not get to chose to not do it and use the money in other ways. So, if it's true that they used the conversion money for reshoots, it's because Fox has no interest in putting any more cash into this thing, AND thinks so lowly of it that they don't even mind if it's not in 3D.
Okay, now I get what you're saying. Though to be fair, judging by the nightmare stories about Josh Trank on the set of the reboot, Fox likely spent enough trying to repair the damage that he caused.
lets not plan his career's funeral just yet.
True Savior
Member
The less 3d , the better.
I don't see how this is a possibility considering the marketing blitz and positive reviews for Ant-Man and there has been almost no publicity for FF.
Broken Joystick
At least you can talk. Who are you?
I'll be very surprised if this outdoes Ant-Man. But no-one can even make that prediction right now, seeing as neither movie is out.
Rights won't revert, of course, the film could probably make $1 and rights won't revert.
People also said spiderman would never be in a Marvel studios movie. They might decide to do a quick payout instead of pouring money and time into a production that won't see a return on an investment.
Remember they can't sit on the rights they have to pump out a movie ever few years.
Remember they can't sit on the rights they have to pump out a movie ever few years.
This isn't like X-Men which is a guaranteed moneymaker and a proven track record for Fox. If FF bombs in the box office, there's very little justification for them to keep the rights.
SamuelSupreme
Banned
Because he's a fucking hacker named Victor Domashev who only uses Doom as a hacker moniker online prior to the movie....Fuck that shit. I need Victor Von Doom King of Latveria and general boss of the Marvel Universe...besides Doom needs more than just The Fantastic Four to truly be represented.
FOX doesn't have the relationship with Marvel that Sony does. There's enough bad blood there that I could see FOX holding on to the rights purely out of spite.
Doom is beyond a single country, Doom is beyond a continent, Doom is beyond a planet or even a universe. Doom commands this and all realities!!!
People need to stop anthromorphizing companies, Fox only cares about FF's profit potential. Which isn't that good. Spite doesn't make money
They're not going to give up on the profit potential after one film. They've got four, young, up and coming actors locked down for at least three movies. And there's the inevitable X-Men/F4 crossover movie which, if done right, could make some massive cash.
Not that simple.
Alright, time to go see this movie! Let's see, what's the first screening? Hmm...10:55 is a little early to head out for a movie. Oh well, there's another and hour and a half later. I'll just go to...wait. The next 2D showing isn't until 4:25?! Oh, of course...half the screenings are taken up by the damn 3D version.
Inside Out's fantastic in 3D, though.
Umm 3 films, this is their 3rd time at bat.
Baron von Loathsome
Member
May as well wrap it up and put a bow on it for Marvel Studios.
badcrumble
Member
I could see Fox's estimation of FF's worth dropping, but I'm not sure there's a viable scenario in which Fox sees it as worth less money than Marvel does.
It'd require X-Men and its associated properties to be doing tremendously well, so Fox wouldn't feel the need to diversify and prop up their superhero slate.
It'd require FF to bomb, obviously.
It'd also require the Marvel films to start flagging at the box office so Marvel would feel the need to invest money to get those rights back and inject some new material into the MCU. It's this last part that I'm most skeptical about, because Marvel seems to believe they can just keep bringing in less-known heroes and villains if they need to and make them more famous/interesting.
It'd require X-Men and its associated properties to be doing tremendously well, so Fox wouldn't feel the need to diversify and prop up their superhero slate.
It'd require FF to bomb, obviously.
It'd also require the Marvel films to start flagging at the box office so Marvel would feel the need to invest money to get those rights back and inject some new material into the MCU. It's this last part that I'm most skeptical about, because Marvel seems to believe they can just keep bringing in less-known heroes and villains if they need to and make them more famous/interesting.
outunderthestars
Banned
Thats the beauty of Marvel, they haven't even tapped their 0.001% of their shit. They just now starting supernatural shit.
Ant-Man is currently seeing a marketing blitz & has a respectable 70% on Rotten Tomatoes right now. If Fox can replicate both (or better), then maybe. But It's not like they spent less money on the film. If what we heard is true, then all that money that would have gone towards 3D went towards the reshoots. And while yes, Josh Trank did deny him not directing the reshoots, he never denied the 3D budget being redirected towards the reshoots (this was way before the 3D version of the film was officially cancelled).
Sad thing is, you're not exactly wrong.
Not really, recent X-Men films don't make as much money as they used to. DoFP did well, sure, but that's only because they got the old cast back on top of positive word-of-mouth. And even then (despite beating Winter Soldier), it wasn't enough to beat Guardians (who were nobodies at the time) at the box office. Not to mention the lack of merchandise & there being no cartoon for the X-Men or F4, neither franchise is as big as they used to be.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
Um, DoFP did almost $300m more worldwide than Last Stand did. That is a pretty big increase. It was the highest grossing film of the series, and by a large margin as well.
Yes, the original cast and good word of mouth helped, but don't discount it being tops in its franchise.
But the problem is that even their best couldn't top Guardians of all movies. And like I said earlier, DoFP's success was attributed to the film's positive reviews & the fact that it had the old cast in it.
Then we eat crow, simple as that. I'm somewhat hopeful that those reshoots helped the film out, but the footage shown at SDCC (which I believe were post-reshoot) was met with mostly mixed responses.
Succinct Verbosity
Member
Was X-Men First Class in D? the only reason I ask is because I re-call First Class having some pretty intense re-shoots that mad a lot pf people assume the worst, yet it ended up being one of the better superhero films.
No, it didn't have 3D. Though the fact that they were able to turn that movie around through reshoots is what makes me somewhat hopeful that Fantastic Four can be salvaged.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
But couldn't you also attribute GotG success to positive reviews and word of mouth?
I am not in any way downplaying GotG's success. It was much bigger than almost everyone anticipated it being. It is just that you seem to be downplaying the success of DoFP. Both movies were very successful in the end, and were very highly rated by audiences and critics.
That's also true, Guardians surprised everybody in both quality & box office pull. But like you said, at the end of the day, both were great films that saw the success they deserved at the box office.
MrPink93485
Member
It says little about DOFP and more about how Guardians' resonated with audiences.
DOFP did extremely well on its own terms and it seems likely Apocalypse will continue an upward trend, at least worldwide.
Actually, I think Apocalypse will be the X-Men franchise's real test for longevity.
I only hate on 3D because it takes up the biggest screens at the theater. I can't watch Star Wars in IMAX because it will be IMAX 3D and ONLY 3D. At least throw me an early bird before noon showing bone
Succinct Verbosity
Member
I only hate on 3D because it takes up the biggest screens at the theater. I can't watch Star Wars in IMAX because it will be IMAX 3D and ONLY 3D. At least throw me an early bird before noon showing bone
Yeah this. It's hard to say it'sabout choice when it is increasingly difficult to find 2D ones.
To be fair, some of GAF has a valid complaint. 3D is easy money for filmmakers. Ditching it either means that they didn't receive extra funding & they had to sacrifice something for the reshoots, or that the studio isn't confident enough in the film to invest in 3D.
Agreed. I mean, if I could see an IMAX movie in 2D, I would.
- Status