|Posted: 10 September 2018 at 1:51am | IP Logged | 8
Doug, why wouldn't Fox have had the budget? That's not a rhetorical or smart-arse question (damn the lack of body language online, eh?!), but genuinely curious as to why a big studio couldn't have given us a proper Galactus.
Budget means just that: the amount of money allocated to a particular film. It does not mean "all the money a studio has available." And it does not mean what you or I think something should cost, but rather, what it actually costs relative to the rest of the production.
FF 2's script was greenlit and budgeted with a focus on the Surfer, improving sets and VFX for the FF and Doctor Doom, and a plan to include Galactus in the final moments. With the film well underway and costs climbing due to the extent of the existing characters' VFX needs, bids for Galactus shots came in much higher than initially spec'd, and both the studio and the production team decided to wait until they could answer questions like: Who will play him, and how is that person to be paid and featured? What is he standing on? Will we show him talking? Will we show his ship? Will he make world-destroying machinery out of thin air? Will he unleash the Punisher?
In some cases, simply exploring these decisions carried costs that were justifiably deemed too high to assume late in the game for a film in which he'd only be featured for a few shots. They punted, and I repeat: that was not a bad call under the circumstances.
I agree, they were giving us Hobbits in the same frame as normal sized people around that time, would a Galactus sized guy be THAT expensive?
Frodo is 1/3rd the size of a human and was realized mostly using in-camera FX with a lot of development time to fine-tune the techniques. Galactus is nearly 30 feet tall, has been described as a "force of nature", and his development came late in the game. Not even remotely same thing in budget terms.
Didnít have the budget? This was post Ghostbusters & the Stay Puft Marshmellow man, post The Phantom Menace, Post King Kong.
I don't understand what you are getting at here. Three different productions from different eras made under completely different circumstances--and two of them with horrible levels of VFX excess. In no way are any of these a barometer for how Fox should have approached Galactus, unless you think Boss Nass is where the bar was set.
Big guy in suit does not a big budget make. They easily could have realised a respectful, faithful Galactus, but I suspect that oh-so-common contempt/fear/loathing for the source was the barrier.
I don't know why you guys think "big guy in suit" or "big purple guy" would have been the extent of the work required to bring Galactus to life onscreen for this film. Given what had already been allocated for the production, there was nothing "easy" about adding Galactus and the decision not to do so had nothing to do with the motivations you claim.
My disappointment--and even anger--with the Fox's handling of the franchise is as great as anyone here. The sins are many--bad casting, bad writing, etc. But however poor the execution, there was a very clear initiative at Fox to put a more faithful version of the FF onscreen in RISE than the previous film. Ultimately, the second film couldn't shed the baggage of the first, but it wasn't for lack of trying.
I've suffered through the same shit-ass superhero adaptions in all forms of media as everyone else. But it is plainly obvious given the silhouette that they deliberately included in multiple shots that Fox was not crapping on the character, but rather, waiting to fully feature him in a subsequent film. We have more than enough hard evidence to show that when a filmmaker or executive dislikes a character, we will know it. The notion that this studio must hate the source material because they only featured Galactus' shadow is nonsense.
Which brings me back to the point I was originally making: Fox has made a litany of mistakes with Marvel properties, but criticizing the studio for only hinting at Galactus in an otherwise mediocre movie is like calling up the bad contractor who nearly ruined your house and yelling at him because he didn't have time to do any work on your garage. Some things are better left untouched.