Completely CGI Thing Confirmed for Fantastic Four Reboot
Jul 28, 2010 by Paul YoungThere’s been talk of making The Thing a completely CGI character in the upcoming Fantastic Four reboot but there has been no confirmation one way or the other… until now.
Both Fantastic Four movies had a multitude of issues – direction, story, most of the special FX, lighting, blah, blah, blah – but the one thing (pun intended) I enjoyed the most was Michael Chiklis’ performance as The Thing. It was too bad that he was covered in orange foam and makeup for most of both movies because he is, in my opinion, a fantastic actor.
Personal issues with the films aside, the biggest problem came in the form of the suit Chiklis wore to play The Thing. The suit in and of itself was actually a very good special FX job and it made for a great practical effect. That problem is that it stood out when compared to the other three CG-heavy super powers on screen.
Since there was no practical way to show a man stretching, a man on fire flying and a woman turning invisible those FX had to be done with CG. I can appreciate 20th Century Fox’s desire to make a practical effect but in this case I whole heartedly believe it was the wrong decision to make.
It would seem that the suits in charge of 20th Century Fox have heard the fans’ complaints because I have it from a source inside the Fox SFX department working on the Fantastic Four Reboot (officially titled Fantastic Four Reborn) that The Thing will officially be 100% CG.
This is excellent news because with all the advancements in CG technology, a properly done CG Thing will look absolutely fantastic! One of the major complaints about the 2nd Thing suit was the size ( I say 2nd because Roger Corman made the 1st suit in the 90s); Thing is supposed to be a big, hulking, rock monster type creature who is able to lift hundreds, if not thousands, of tons and dwarf everyone on his team in size. This just can’t be pulled off in a practical suit.
A few great examples of what a properly done, oversized person/beast/superhero done in CG look like would be Mr. Hyde from Van Helsing, Hulk from Ang Lee’s 2003 movie as well as the newer Hulk and Abomination from The Incredible Hulk. Now before you start bashing me that most of those films sucked, with the exception of The Incredible Hulk, they all represent what a properly done 100% CG large character can look like.
Another thing my source noted was that work on Fantastic Four Reborn has been put on the back burner until X-Men: First Class is in the can and shooting for that film doesn’t begin until September 21st, 2010. So it could be awhile before we see any images or graphics related to the Fantastic Four Reborn film.
On a personal side note – my proudest moment of Comic Con this year came when Michael Chiklis asked for me to take his picture with one of our Minimalist Superhero Posters that we were handing out at the Con.
What are your thoughts on a completely CG Thing clobberin’ up the screen?
Around the web:
Loading ...
I actually have to strongly disagree with making the Thing entirely CG. Yes, Chiklis was on the small side for the Thing, that I will agree with. However, the Thing’s defining trait is his humanity, and having a gifted actor in the suit allowed that humanity to shine through. You just can’t get that with a CGI muppet. The Hulk looked good, but he did look fake, and the only emotion the Incredible Hulk showed was rage. The Thing needs to have the ability portray the entire spectrum of emotion, and CGI just doesn’t replace a gifted actor.
Chiklis as the Thing was by far the best thing about the Fantastic Four films, especially the first one. I think making the Thing all CG is a mistake.
Say Jay, were you aware that in several scenes in “King Kong” Naomi Watts was a CGI creation because the scenes would have been too dangerous for a human actor? You say that,”CGI just doesn’t replace a gifted actor”. If that is so you should be able to tell me the scenes in which Naomi was CGI and why she looked phony in those scenes.
CGI can, and has, created characters that are indistinguishable from a human actor. That is why Superman should be all CGI since no human actor has his physical charateristics. However, he can be made to look like a human actor. I am surprised that no one seems to see this.
One thing great about a CGI Thing is no storyline that forces you to see the actor.
The CGI WAS why I hated the most in the Hulk movies.
Not impressed
How could u do Hulk without CGI? Troll
Ummmmm use a body builder with green??? That wways it looks more real. Hulk isn’t suppose to be 8 feet, he’s only 5 feet. I read the comic book.
um since when is hulk only 5 feet tall? i read comics too and the hulk has never, ever been five foot tall.
Not all comic-book films have to be as weighty and angst-filled as a graphic novel. Fantastic Four is neither fantastic nor incredible, but it’s entertaining nonetheless.
i agree a great character like that needs to be done practical with light cg added where it is needed.
practical and cg compliment each other if done by someone who really cares,cg alone really takes a fall.
all the hollywood stuff sucks its realy sad already a reboot,it sa new hype or so sjees
so we watch a cool movie made today and tomorrorw you can forget about …a new reboot movie is made sucks
If they are going to reboot the FF, I think it would be cool to see Namor introduced to take on the FF. The love triangle between Reed, Sue and Namor could be explored and the battles between Human Torch, Thing and Namor could be great! Dwayne Johnson or the guy from Games of Thrones could portray Namor. Could be a good film. Maybe better than the other 2 films that was put out.
I wholeheartedly agree. Ben Grimm must be CGI.And Dr. Doom must be clad in armor.R-E-B-O-O-T Now!!!!!